SF 239 
.P54 
Copy 1 



SOME OF THE INFI.UENCES AFFECTING MILK 
PRODUCTION 

BY 

IvEROY ANDERSON 



SOME OF THE INFLUENCES AFFECTING MILK 
PRODUCTION 

WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE RELATION 
OF FOOD TO MILK FAT 



THESIS 



PRESENTED TO THE 



University Faculty of Cornell University 



FOR THE DEGREE OF 



DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 



LEROY ANDERSON, B. S., M. S. A. 



ITHACA, NEW YORK 
JUNE, 190a 



L?' TABlvE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

Introduction 5 

The Developing Influence of Natural Environment 7 

Hereditary Influences 11 

The Influence of Food 16 

Summary of Experiments concerning the Relation of Food to 

Milk Fat 18 

Experiments at Cornell University 33 

The First Experiment 1895-6 35 

The Second Experiment 1896-7 38 

Charts 45 

Feeding Pabn-nut Meal 52 

The Relation of the Temperature of the Cow to the 

Secretion of Milk Fat 57 

Influence of Oestrum 66 

Influence of Spaying 67 

Relation of Temperature to Secretion of Milk Fat 68 

Charts 72 

The Relation between Percentage of Fat and Total 

Pounds of Fat 80 

General Summary 85 

Conclusions 88 

Bibliography go 



INTRODUCTION 

This paper contains a summary of investigations concerning 
the relation of food to milk-fat and the record of considerable 
original experimentation to determine the influence of food and 
of certain conditions of the cow upon the secretion of milk. 
That portion of the thesis which treats of the influence of food 
was prepared primarily for publication as Bulletin No. 173 of 
the Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station. The 
experimental data obtained by Messrs. Johnson and Lauman 
from their experiments of 1896 and 1897 respectively were entirely 
worked over by the writer for publication in the above named 
bulletin, and is, therefore, considered to justly have a place in a 
paper of this kind. The report of the investigations concerning 
the relation of the temperature of the cow to the secretion of 
milk is offered as a line of study which is new in the field of 
animal production. The other chapters and the general sum- 
mary contain some of the conclusions that are believed to be 
warranted by the knowledge concerning milk secretion which 
has been secured up to the present time by historical record and 
experimental research. 

Acknowledgment is due Professor Henry H. Wing for his 
helpful suggestions during the progress of these investigations. 

Lbroy Anderson. 

Cornell University, 

Ithaca, N. Y., June, 1902. 



THE DEVELOPING INFLUENCES OF NATURAL 
ENVIRONMENT 

The varied influences which go to make up the life of an 
individual or mould the character of^ an entire race are so manj' 
and so potent that it would be difiicult to give to any one influ- 
ence the place of first importance. Moreover, influences do not 
work singly in their effect upon organic life and it is, therefore, 
impossible to define the limits of each. It is more to the point 
and more satisfactory to discuss the leading factors which have 
had to do with organic development in a broad way, when we 
may the more clearly perceive the relation to each other of the 
minor forces which go to make up the main influences. 

Among the strongest of these leading factors is the natural 
environment in which a breed or race of animals has been 
developed, i. e. the climate, soil, food and all of the other subtle 
forces which go to make up the habitat of an animal. It is not 
essential that the mind of man should have been present to guide 
the mating and care of individuals according to some precon- 
ceived and fixed type. Differences in the determining natural 
forces named above, in which man plays only as an added force 
in the natural selection, are sufficient to develop races of animals 
possessing characters so widely varying as to form what we call 
breeds. That the different breeds of cattle sprang from one 
source is believed to be one of the established facts in the evolu- 
tion of animal life. " The systematic naturalist, who generally 
knows nothing of the art of breeding, who does not pretend to 
know how and when the several domestic races were formed, 
who cannot have seen the intermediate gradations, for they do 
not now exist, nevertheless feels no doubt that these races are 
sprung from a single source."* 

We have but to notice the changes made in animal form, or in 
the production of meat and milk during the past half century, 
to make it readily conceivable that the antipodes of breed charac- 
teristics could have developed from one parent stock during the 

* Darwin. Animals and Plants under Domestication, Vol. II, p. 233. 



8 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

ages which cattle have undoubtedly been upon the earth. The 
most noted and remarkable differences are found between the 
cattle whose whole tendency is to produce meat and those whose 
tendency is to produce milk. But it is more to our point to con- 
sider the latter only and amongst these varieties are found breeds 
which show marked characteristics. No better illustration of 
opposites in development in dairy cattle could be imagined than 
is afforded by the Jersey cattle on the one hand and the Holstein- 
Friesian on the other. Their differences are indicated in form, 
size, and quantity and quality of milk. 

The history of Holstein-Friesian cattle is known, in legend at 
least, for more than two thousand years, and the important part 
in their history is a study of the soil, climate and food which 
made up the formative portion of their environment during this 
long period. The native home of these cattle is that portion 
of The Netherlands lying contiguous to the North Sea where 
the climate is cool and moist, both by reason of much fog and a 
high degree of precipitation. The soil is of that dense, clayey 
nature which, with the large amount of moisture prevailing 
induces a luxuriant growth of grass. This combination also 
produces a pasturage which carries a high percentage of water 
and a correspondingly low content of dry or nutrient substance. 

Holland dairy practice has been, for the most part, to have 
the cows calve during the spring months so as to have them in 
the flush of milking when turned from winter stable to pasture. 
The cows, then, during their heaviest milking period and dur- 
ing the time when they were obliged to consume the most food 
in order to produce milk as well as to maintain life and growth, 
were forced to obtain the needed sustenance from the prevailing 
luxuriant but watery grass. In order to secure sufficient nour- 
ishment, the cow must take into her body large amounts of this 
succulent food, and the natural result of such feeding was to 
develop a large abdomen with a correspondingly large digestive 
capacity. The correlative effect upon the size was to make it 
larger and upon the bony structure to make it somewhat coarse 
and angular. But what is more to our present purpose is the 
effect of these large quantities of watery food upon milk pro- 
duction. The natural result has been to induce a flow of milk 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 9 

which is not equaled in quantity by any other breed of cattle 
a'nd which carries a lower percentage of butter fat and other 
solids than the milk of any other of the improved dairy breeds. 

Quite opposite to the above conditions were those under which 
the Jersey cattle have been developed. Their native Isle in the 
English Channel possesses a climate made mild and equable by 
the Gulf Stream, and one much dryer than the climate of North 
Holland and Friesland. The soil is a light loam, carrying in 
connection with the relatively light precipitation, an herbage 
which is not abundant, but is comparatively high in nutritive 
substance and low in water content. Whether the Jersey cow 
were at pasture or whether stall fed, at no time was she obliged 
to consume large quantities of succulent food in order to pro- 
vide the nourishment that her system required. Her digestive 
organs were not, therefore, unduly distended and the correlative 
effect of her food conditions were such as to develop a moder- 
ately sized body and a rather fine bony structure. In the pro- 
duction of milk, the result of her environment and food has 
been to produce a moderate amount which is richer in fat and 
other solids than the milk of any other breed of cattle. 

That the wide variations found between the breeds under dis- 
cussion are due in a large degree to different conditions of soil, 
climate and food is believed to be quite true. What the original 
type of animal was in either case before coming under the influ- 
ences where history records their beginning as distinct breeds, 
no one knows. What they are to-day and what has been their 
habitat for centuries is known to all readers of animal history. 
There can be but one conclusion, viz., that the natural condi- 
tions and exigencies which go to make up the environment of 
the respective countries are responsible in the largest degree for 
the dissimilarity between the two breeds. 

To-day the Jersey and Holstein-Friesian cattle are battling for 
dairy supremacy in the same field. They have been in this 
country in large numbers for a quarter of a century, and the 
change in environment is being watched with deep interest. 
Here they have been subjected to similar conditions of food, 
care and climate. On the one hand, the Jerseys have exper- 
ienced a change to a more succulent ration in the shape of corn 



lo Influences Affecting Milk Production 

silage and like forage crops than their native Isle afforded. On 
the other, the Holstein-Friesians have been fed more con- 
centrated food and been obliged to range more over scant and 
hilly pastures than they were accustomed to do at home. If 
there be any definite change it is difficult to prove it by experi- 
mental data. Breeders of Jerseys claim that the American type 
is larger and coarser than the Island progenitor and also than 
the Island type of to-day. It is also claimed that they yield a 
greater amount of milk and of no decreasing quality. I^eading 
breeders of Holstein-Friesians claim that the American type is 
finer in form and bony structure, and gives richer milk than the 
Holland ancestors. They contend also that the quantity of milk 
has not decreased while the quality has been improving. None 
of these claims as to milking qualities can be substantiated by 
accurate data because no records of milk production were kept 
twenty-five years ago as to-day. There is, however, no reason 
for doubting the claims, for if we question them we would also 
question the possibility of the improvement of animals, of which 
there can be no doubt. That the larger and coarser animal 
should grow smaller and finer and the smaller and finer animal 
grow larger and coarser, when changed from the natural habitat 
which had produced that largeness or smallness, to one and the 
same land and to like conditions, is of interest and value in 
bearing out the conclusions as to the influence of natural envi- 
ronment in moulding the form and characteristics of animals to 
so great an extent as to build up different breeds. 



HEREDITARY INFLUENCES 

Another set of influences which is of very great moment in 
the development of individuals and of races is that due to hered- 
ity. Without this factor any eflfect which environment may 
have upon one generation would be of no value to the succeed- 
ing generation. It is not to the purpose here to discuss heredity 
in all of its rami6cations, but rather to point to the larger 
phases of the subject which have been found to be most instru- 
mental in the upbuilding of the animal kingdom and especially 
the dairy cow as it is found to-day. It will be sufficient at the 
outset to take for a theme, the possibility that any or all charac- 
teristics may be transmitted from generation to generation and 
that whatever affects the parent may find expression also in the 
offspring. 

We have seen that the Holstein-Friesian cattle have, through 
many centuries, developed a capacity for producing large 
amounts of milk. We have seen that the Jersey cattle have, 
through possibly a less number of centuries, developed a capac- 
ity for producing a milk very rich in total solid substance. Did 
we carry the study further we would find the Herefords follow- 
ing a development that has induced the formation of flesh and 
not of milk except to a very small degree. Still further we 
would find the Shorthorns represented on the one hand by a 
portion of the breed resembling the Hereford in meat and non- 
milk producing power, and on the other hand by another portion 
of the breed resembling somewhat the milking characteristics of 
the Holland cattle and also the flesh producing feature of a more 
approved beef strain. 

These varied and quite opposite characteristics are due in the 
first place to those conditions which have been discussed in the 
preceding chapter. A change in the food or habit of the animal 
induces a change in the organic being in order to render the 
animal at home in its environment. In other words a variation 
from the parental type has occurred, which variation will be per- 
manent within the individual depending upon the permanency 
of the altered environment. This variation may be good or bad 
according to the character of the outward influence. If the 



12 Infi^uences Affecting Milk Production 

change be in the direction of more and better food, more com- 
fortable quarters and more hygienic use the resultant variation 
is quite sure to be a beneficent one, and vice versa. 

The possibility of variation entering the life and function of 
an individual is dependent upon the fundamental principle of 
the mutability of all organic beings, which in turn finds its 
origin in the mobile nature of the living plasm of the cells that 
combine to make up the organic being. Changes in form of 
any portion of the animal body are due to a change in the nutri- 
tion and use of that portion. The function of an organ is not 
readily altered, but its capacity for production or secretion may 
be easily influenced, e.g., the function of the epithelial cells of 
the udder is to secrete milk ; abundance or scarcity of food, 
good or bad use, may alter the amount of milk produced, but 
nothing can change the primal function of the organ. Upon 
the fixedness of function may be based the certainty of the 
inheritance of organic life and upon the mobility of cellular pro- 
toplasm, the principle of variation without which there could be 
no improvement. 

Given a permanent variation in an individual its offspring are 
born with a tendency in a like direction, which tendency may 
be accentuated by a continuance of the conditions causing the 
parental variation. Improvement in animals begun by a desir- 
able variation is, then, carried toward perpetuation by selecting 
for breeding those individuals which show the most advance- 
ment under the bettered environment. Improvement is most 
rapid when the mind of man is present to guide the selection in 
the direction of a preconceived standard. But even if a pre- 
conceived ideal be not before the breeder's eye, he will uncon- 
sciously mate such animals as show the most variation in the 
desired direction, i. e., those which conform most readily to the 
environment in which he has placed them. 

The power of selection in rendering aid in animal improve- 
ment depends upon the presence of variability, for were there 
no variability between animals there would be no need for the 
practice of selection. Selection in breeding has been the most 
powerful ally of environment in moulding breed characteristics. 
In fact, so far as man's work is concerned it may be said to be 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 13 

the chief controlling force. By means of selection in taking 
advantage of the effects of environment, the world now pos- 
sesses its highly developed breeds of domestic animals. It may 
overcome even the natural tendencies of food in developing a 
breed. The possibility is that the native foods of the Tees 
valley and of North Holland are such as to tend to build a race 
of cattle to produce meat and milk^ respectively. But had the 
men who are responsible for the breeds which there originated, 
selected those Shorthorns which showed the greatest tendencies 
toward milk production and the Holstein-Friesians showing the 
strongest leanings toward meat production, the probability is 
that the present classification in which these two breeds find 
themselves would be reversed. We have previously referred to 
such a possibility in the fact that part of the Shorthorn breed is 
looked upon as dairy stock. The difference between them and 
their beef producing sisters was brought about wholly by a sys- 
tem of selection. 

In the light of these facts we may even say that man is able to 
direct the course of food nutrients in the animal by his use of the 
power of selection. If he wishes to change a beef producing 
breed to a milk standard his plan is to breed from such individ- 
uals as show the strongest dairy tendency, although that tendency 
be at first slight. In other words the breeder is transferring the 
disposition of the animal's food from building tissue or body fat 
to the work of secreting milk in the udder. There is not nec- 
essarily any change in the process of digestion ; there is no 
change in function of individual organs ; the change is in the 
degree or extent of the function by lessening the activity of flesh 
producing cells and increasing that of the cells which secrete 
milk. By reversing the method of selection a dairy breed may 
be changed to one producing beef. 

The influence of selection in thus transforming cattle is greatly 
enhanced by man's care of the milk secreting organ. By irreg- 
ular and incomplete milking, the secretion tends to decline in 
quantity until it ceases altogether, when if the same food supply 
be continued, the animal lays on flesh. On the other hand, 
regular, careful and complete withdrawal of milk from the udder 
tends to keep up the milk flow. It is upon this basis that the 



J4 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

domesticated cow has been developed into a state of giving milk 
for a year or more continuously, when in her wild, native con- 
dition, the period of lactation was only of sufl&cient length to 
provide food for the calf until he was old and strong enough to 
subsist upon other food. An approximation to the wild state is 
found to-day among the cattle upon the large stock ranges. 
Often one of the cows is taken from the range herd with the 
view of making a milch cow of her, but there is always disap- 
pointment, for her milk flows only for a few months at the most. 
Her environment and the method of selection has been such that 
she inherits a tendency for a brief period of lactation. By proper 
food and use and wise selection this tendency may be gradually 
overcome until her descendants, several generations removed, 
will possess a lactation period of approved duration. 

Phenomena such as here described may not be substantiated 
by what are to-day considered authentic experimental data. 
Nevertheless they are a matter of history which is held to be true 
by all reliable testimony. The influences of heredity as here out- 
lined are slow in working out these changes in production, which 
to the uninformed may appear beyond the realm of possibility. 

Referring to the immediate influence of heredity upon the 
secretion of milk we find experimental data largely wanting, both 
in extent and in the certainty of conclusions. One example will 
serve to illustrate : Cederholm * furnishes some data upon the 
influence of heredity on the quality of cows' milk and says that 
three of the bulls used caused a marked improvement in the 
quality of the milk produced by their offspring. One bull had 
five daughters, each of which gave poorer milk than her dam. 
This bull was out of a cow that produced milk having an average 
per cent of fat of 3.06. "In general the greatest improvement 
was observed in case of cows producing the poorest grades of 
milk. The data so far secured on this point are not considered 
sufficient to permit of definite conclusions as to the relative 
influence of the ancestors of a cow on the quality of milk pro- 
duced by her, but they show, at any rate, that the bull exerts a 
a decided influence for better or worse on the milk product of 
his progeny. " 

* I/andmannen, 11 (1900) p. 57, Abs. E. S. R. by F. W. Woll. 



^ 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 15 

Tabulations of records in a similar way have been made in 
other instances by various parties, but the usual result is that 
the data are insufficient to furnish conclusive evidence. The 
fact is thaf systematic records of milk production, and especially 
of the quality of the milk, are of so recent beginning in dairy 
practice that it is extremely difficult to secure a line of descent 
of sufficient length to furnish data po^essing experimental value. 
The influences which have developed the present milking powers 
of the dairy breeds have been working for centuries and every 
evidence adds to the belief that heredity works slowly in improv- 
ing the quantity or quality of any animal product. No short 
cut has yet been discovered whereby the individual yield of milk 
or butter may be doubled among the members of the improved 
breeds. On the other hand no one who is conversant with the 
history of cattle will admit that there is not yet room for large 
improvement. But the increase in production must come through 
a careful fostering of such environmental conditions as will 
induce desirable variations and then seeking to perpetuate those 
variations through methodical selection. 



THE INFLUENCE OF FOOD 

There are two main divisions of the question concerning the 
relation of food to milk secretion. On the one hand is the rela- 
tion of food supply to the quantity of milk produced and on the 
other its relation to the quality of the milk by which is usually 
meant the proportion of butter fat present. So far as the quan- 
tity is concerned there is no doubt as to the immediate and ulti- 
mate effect of the food supply. Given an abundant supply of 
food furnishing nourishment in all necessary nutrients and we 
may expect as large a flow of milk as the capacity of the cow will 
permit. Let the food supply be restricted either in total digesti- 
ble substance or in the essential nutrients and the yield of milk 
will be less than the normal capacity of the cow. All experi- 
ments bearing upon this subject have shown the intimate relation 
between food supply and the yield of milk. 

^ Concerning the relation of food to milk-fat, experimental 
research has been somewhat contradictory. Some experiments 
have seemed to indicate that certain foods possess the power of 
increasing the proportion of fat in milk, while others, and much 
the larger number, show that the variations in the quality of 
milk are not traceable to the food. All who are familiar with 
the handling of milk know that variations in the per cent of fat 
do exist and this with the same cow on the same feed and under 
uniform environment. Why the quality of milk fluctuates so 
widely under conditions which to all outward appearances are 
the same, has never been determined experimentally. 

Experiments conducted for the purpose of determining the 
relation of food to milk production have usually shown that 
where a sudden and radical change in the food has taken place, 
this change has been accompanied by a more than ordinary var- 
iation in the per cent of fat. This variation may be either an 
increase or a decrease. After the cows become accustomed to the 
new feed their milk returns to its former average per cent of fat, 
which may be called the normal per cent. Such phenomena 
would seem to indicate that the per cent of fat in milk is subject 
to the peculiar constitution of the cow and that she will give milk 
of a certain average composition so long as nothing occurs to dis- 
turb the " even tenor of her way." 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 17 

A definite knowledge of the relation of food to milk- fat would 
solve the question as to whether or not the per cent of fat may- 
be permanently increased by feeding. But concerning this point 
we have little information except theories based upon the results 
of many experiments. One theory has been long and largely 
held that milk-fat is produced from the protein in the food. If 
this were the case a natural supposition would be that by increas- 
ing the amount of protein in the food, the proportion of fat in 
the milk would be thereby increased. Another theory is that 
milk-fat is produced from the fat in the food. Then feeding 
an increased amount of fat might be supposed to result in a 
higher per cent of fat in the milk ; or, on the other hand, a 
decrease in the supply of food-fat would likewise cause a decrease 
in the per cent of milk-fat. A third theory, and the one which 
is most largely entertained, is that so long as the animal is well 
nourished the per cent of fat in the milk is not appreciably 
affected by even wide variations in the character of the food. 
Experiments supporting these three theories will be found in 
subsequent pages. 

The question has a practical bearing in the economical man- 
agement of the dairy. For, if by food we may increase the rich- 
ness of the milk, then there is opportunity to enhance the value 
of all our cows. Butter-fat is the most valuable constituent of 
milk, and if the cow may be made to produce a milk richer in 
fat by giving her certain foods, or foods containing a large pro- 
portion of a particular nutrient, then the dairyman may increase 
the value of his cows to the extent that they may be made to 
respond to the particular foods by increased production of fat. 
Again if feeding large amounts of protein tend to an increased 
production of milk-fat, then the dairyman will need to purchase 
foods containing a high proportion of protein, which foods usually 
command higher prices than those containing less protein. If, 
on the other hand, a large supply of protein is not essential to 
the production of milk-fat ; or, if it is not governed by the food 
so long as the cow is well nourished, then the dairyman is war- 
ranted in feeding those cheaper foods which contain less protein 
and more carbohydrates and fat. 

The experimental work which has come within the immediate 



1 8 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

notice or supervision of the writer upon this mooted question is 
herein described. The record is giVen of two long experiments 
with rations having different nutritive ratios, and also a less 
extended one with a ration containing varying quantities of 
palm nut meal. Considerable space is given to a summary of 
the leading experiments relating to the influence of food on milk 
production with especial reference to the quality of the milk, by 
which is meant here its percentage of fat. The records of these 
experiments are gleaned from all reliable sources both domestic 
and foreign. In collecting this data free use has been made of 
all experimental literature obtainable and reference is usually 
made to the original article. The Experiment Station Record 
has been used freely, especially for translations of foreign exper- 
iments which are reported in periodicals not found in the Uni- 
versity library. The attempt has been to make this summary as 
brief as possible and yet give a fair idea of the plan and scope of 
the experiment, together with the results or conclusions obtained. 

Summary of Experiments Concerning the Relation of 
Food to Milk-Fat 

Jordan* experimented on five cows with three different kinds 
of rations during three periods, the rations being made up so as 
to contain varying amounts of vegetable fats, and found that the 
yield of milk diminished somewhat in passing from the ration 
rich in fat to the one containing less fat, and increased slightly 
after changing again to the fat rich ration. " The composition 
of the milk varied but little and no more, or even less, during the 
three periods than is often observed when the ration is not 
changed." 

In a later experiment f Jordan fed three cows during three 
periods of 35 days each on two rations, one having a nutritive 
ratio of 1:6.7 ^^^ the other 1:12.3 and found that " the yield of 
milk from the nitrogenous ration was from one-fifth to more 
than one-third larger than that from the carbonaceous ration. 
In general the milk was materially richer while the cows were 



* Maine Station Annual Report, 1891, p. 62. 
tSame 1893, p. 73. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 19 

fed the ration rich in protein. * * * The composition of the 
milk solids seemed to be independent of the ration. In general 
the proportign of fat increased throughout the experiment with- 
out regard to what the cows were fed, and no evidence is fur- 
nished in support of the notion that by changing the food it is 
possible to produce more butter-fat without an accompanying 
increased production of the other milk'solids." 

Whitcher,* after studying the effect of pasture and silage, and 
of changing the nutritive ratio on the quality of the milk, found 
very little variation in the per cent of fat and concludes : "I 
feel warranted in saying that a given animal by heredity is so 
constituted that she will give a milk of certain average com- 
position ; by judicious or injudicious feeding the amount of milk 
may be largely varied, but the quality of the product will be 
chiefly determined by the individuality of the cow." 

Wood,t in experimenting on the effect of some coarse fodders 
on quantity and quality of milk during several experimental 
periods of two weeks each, found " no variation in the quality of 
the milk that could be attributed to the character of the food." 

Later, J he fed three cows for two weeks on a basal ration of 
silage, clover hay, vetch hay, oats and middlings. Then in three 
subsequent periods of two weeks each, palm oil, cottonseed oil, 
corn oil, oleo oil, cocoanut oil and stearin were fed to different 
cows at the rate of 12 ounces per 1,000 pounds live weight, mak- 
ing a nutritive ratio of 1:6.8. The conclusions reached were : 
" That the first effect of an increase of fat in a cow's ration is to 
increase the per cent of fat in her milk." 

" That with the continuance of such a ration the tendency is 
for the milk to return to its normal condition." 

" That the increase in fat is not due to the oils but to the 
unnatural character of the ration." 

" That the results of this experiment tend to confirm the con- 
clusions expressed in previous bulletins from this Station ; that 
the composition of a cow's milk is determined by the individu- 
ality of the cow, and that although an unusual food may dis- 



*New Hampshire Station Bulletin 9, 1S90. 
f vSame, Bulletin 18, 1892. 
I Same, Bulletin 20, 1894. 



20 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

turb for a time the composition of the milk, its effect is not 
continuous." 

Hills * studied the effect of heavy feeding of grains on milk 
production by giving two cows for two months a continually 
increasing amount of grain until they were receiving all they 
would eat. He found that there was little change in the com- 
position of the milk on increasingly heavy grain feeding, and 
that no connection could be traced between the quality of the 
milk and the food given. 

Hillsf, in a series of feeding tests covering five periods of four 
weeks each, and using thirty-one cows, experimented with vari- 
ous coarse fodders, grains and mixed feeds. The invariable 
conclusion was that there was no material change in the quality 
of the milk as a result of the change in ration. 

Hills I reports that unemulsified cottonseed oil and emulsified 
cottonseed, corn and linseed oils were fed with bran or corn meal 
and bran, hay and silage, as against the same rations without 
the oil. Milk yields to the unit of dry matter eaten were always 
increased when oil was fed, the increase amounting from three 
to nine per cent. The amount of total solids and fat was 
increased by the cottonseed oil feeding from two to fifteen per 
cent, on linseed oil feeding two per cent and on corn oil feeding 
not at all. The quality of milk was always improved at the out- 
set of this class of feeding but quickly returned to normal qual- 
ity or became poorer than usual when corn or linseed oils were 
fed. The increased fat percentage — unaccompanied by rise in 
the percentage of solids not fat — was fairly permanent, lasting 
from four to six weeks, when either raw or emulsified cottonseed 
oil was fed. The length of feeding periods was four to five 
weeks. 

Hills II conducted a series of experiments to learn the effect of 
adding an excessive amount of single nutrients to a cow's ration. 
The feeding periods were four weeks long, of which the first ten 
days were considered preliminary. His general summary is : 



* Vermont Station, Annual Report, 1890, p. 75. 
f Same, 1S95, p. 203. 
X Same, 1899, p. 269. 
II Same, 1900, p. 417. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 21 

"The addition of about one-fifth more digestible protein (in 
Atlantic gluten flour) to a ration of amounts of this nutrient 
greater than standard requirements was practically without effect 
as. a milk stimulant. The addition of about one-fifth more 
digestible carbohydrates (in brown sugar) to a ration containing 
amounts of these nutrients equal to or in excess of standard 
requirements had little or no effect upon either the quantity or 
quality of the milk. The addition of a solid fat (palm oil) to a 
ration already containing digestible ether extract in excess of 
standard requirements increased its digestible fat content about 
one-half. It had a slight effect upon the quantity and a pro- 
nounced effect upon the quality of the milk. The total solid per- 
centage was increased two per cent (0.24 per cent) and the fat 
seven per cent. (0.36 per cent). The increase seems to have 
been a permanent one. 

Cooke, * in reporting an experiment in feeding sugar meal, 
cream gluten meal and germ meal to nine cows for four months 
in periods of four weeks each, says : " We are led to the con- 
clusion that sugar meal and cream gluten have a slight effect 
toward an increase in the richness of the milk." 

Lindseyf fed six cows in nine and fourteen-day periods with 
seven days preliminary feeding to each period on rations con- 
taining amounts of protein which varied from i .3 to 3.76 pounds 
per head daily, and the nutritive ratio varied from 1:4.4 to 1:10. 
The periods were rather short, but the " indications are that the 
composition of the milk, especially the fat, appeared to be favor- 
ably affected by the addition of protein up to three pounds, 
although there was considerable difference in the cows in this 
respect." 

L.indsey, Holland and BillingsJ varied the nutritive ratio of the 
ration from 1:3.86 to 1:9.43 while feeding six cows in two lots of 
three each, during four periods of 21 to 26 days each, with a 
seven-day preliminary period. They conclude: "That the 
same amount of digestible matter in the narrow rations produced 
from II. 8 to 12.9 per cent more milk than did a like amount of 



* Vermont Station, Bulletin 31, 1892. 

f Massachusetts (State) Station Annual Report, 1894, p. 42. 

I Massachusetts (Hatch) Station, Annual Report 1896, p. 100. 



1 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



digestible matter in the wide rations, and that neither the nar- 
row nor wide rations produced any decided change in the com- 
position of the milk." 

L/indsey* summarizes the results of a series of experiments 
extending over a period of six years in which was studied the 
effect upon milk production of feeding rations containing vary- 
ing amounts of protein and of oil (in flaxseed meal) . He concludes 
that "Different amounts of protein do not seem to have any 
influence on the composition of the milk. Linseed oil in flax- 
seed meal, when fed in considerable quantities (1.40 pounds of 
digestible oil daily), increased the fat percentage and decreased 
the nitrogenous matter of the milk. This fat increase was only 
temporary, the milk gradually returning (in four or five weeks) 
to its normal fat content. The nitrogenous matter also grad- 
ually returned to normal, but more slowly than the fat. In 
general, feeds containing much oil have a tendency to slightly 
increase the fat content of milk when first fed. The fat per- 
centage gradually returns to normal." 

Jordan and JentnerJ changed the ration of a cow in three 
ways : " (i) By decreasing the fat in the food from about the 
usual quantity to practically none ; (2) by producing wide 
variations in the protein supply and nutritive ratio, and (3) by 
producing wide variations in the supply of total digestible 
material." The cow was "fed ninety-five days on a ration 
from which the fats had been nearly all extracted, and she con- 
tinued to secrete milk similar to that produced when fed on the 
same kinds of hay and grain in their normal condition." The 
food-fat eaten during this time was 11. 6 pounds, 5.7 pounds of 
which was digested, while the yield of milk-fat was 62.9 pounds. 
Throughout the whole experiment, "the composition of the 
milk bore no definite relation to the amount and kind of food." 

Jordan, Jentner and Fuller X later conducted similar experi- 
ments in which three cows were used : " Cow 12 fed a fat-poor 
ration in which the protein supply was gradually decreased from 
2.6 pounds daily to 1.6 pounds and then gradually restored to 



* Massachusetts (Hatch) Station, Annual Report, 1900, p. 14. 
f New York (State) Station, Bulletin 132, 1897. 
Ij. Same, Bulletin 197, 1901. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 23 

the maximum, with accompanying increase and decrease in car- 
bohydrates so that the digestible dry matter of the ration was 
kept fairly uniform ; Cow 10 fed a ration with normal supply of 
fat at first which was gradually increased to i .4 pounds daily, then 
gradually restored to the normal ; Cow 2 fed the herd ration having 
a nutritive ratio about 1.5.6. These rations were quite varied in 
character and contained some fat-extracted foods ; yet showed a 
quite uniform digestibility of about 70 per cent of the dry mat- 
ter. It is believed that this figure represents fairly the digesti- 
bility of rations made up in part of silage and containing a fair 
proportion of high class grains. A widening of the nutritive 
ratios appeared to render rations less digestible, especiallj^ the 
protein. The marked changes in protein content and in fat con- 
tent of rations did not produce noticeable changes in the charac- 
ter or composition of the milk. In the former test, during 59 
days, 18.4 pounds of fat was formed in the milk which could 
not have had its source in food-fat or food-protein and could 
hardly have been drawn from the cow's body fat as she increased 
in weight 33 pounds in the same time. In this test Cow 12 in 
74 days produced 39 pounds of fat similarly unaccounted for, 
with a body gain of 15 pounds ; and Cow 2, in 4 days i ^ pounds. 
These amounts of fat must have come from the carbohydrates in 
the food." 

"A lessening of protein supply in the food did not produce a 
corresponding decrease of protein in the milk solids, but caused 
a marked lessening of protein decomposition in the body. ^ * 

" Over 40 per cent of the available energy value of the rations 
was used for maintenance, over 30 per cent reappeared in the 
milk solids, leaving a balance of from one-fifth to one-fourth of 
the ration. The logical conclusion is that this balance, in part 
at least, sustains the work of milk secretion." 

Wing * added ordinary beef tallow to the usual grain ration 
of ten cows, giving them at first four ounces per head, and 
increasing the amount gradually until each cow was consuming 
two pounds daily, which amount was fed for six or seven weeks. 
He found " no increase in the per cent of fat in the milk as a 
result of feeding tallow in addition to a liberal grain ration." 

* New York (Cornell) Station, Bulletin 92, 1895. 



24 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

Waters and Hess * gave rations varying in nutritive ratio from 
1:3.9 to 1:6.65 to nine cows through four periods of thirty days 
each, and say : "It appears that the narrower nutritive ratio 
tended to increase the per cent of fat." 

Farrington f studied the effect of heavy grain feeding by giv- 
ing three cows from Dec. i to June i, in eight periods ranging 
from 6 to 51 days, an amount of grain increasing continually 
from 12 to 24 pounds per head daily where it was held for two 
months, when it was decreased gradually until the cows went to 
pasture, May i. The nutritive ratio varied from 1:4 to 1:9.4. 
He found " that the increase of feed was accompanied by a con- 
siderable increase in the pounds of milk produced, and conse- 
quently in the pounds of solids, fat, and solids not fat in the 
milk ; but with the exception of one or two days, there were 
no greater changes in the percentages of fat in the milk after 
the increase of feed than before it was made. ' ' 

Wilson, Kent, Curtiss and Patrick J compared corn and cob 
meal with sugar meal by feeding them to four cows in alternat- 
ing periods of 21 days each with a lo-day preliminary period, 
and conclude that "quality of milk, so far as measured by its 
percentage of fat, was changed by feed to a much greater degree 
than was quantity. Sugar meal produced 17 per cent more fat 
and six per cent more total solids per 100 pounds of milk than 
did the corn and cob meal." 

Armsby,|| during three periods of three weeks each with two 
cows compared bran with corn meal and found that while there 
were slight changes in the composition of the milk there was 
" no indication that the feeding had anything to do with these 
changes." Again in comparing in a similar manner bran with 
oil meal there were slight changes as before, but " we may safely 
conclude that whatever changes took place in the composition of 
the milk- solids were due to advancing lactation and not to the 
feed." 



* Pennsylvania Station, Annual Report, 1895, p. 56, 

f Illinois Station, Bulletin 24, 1894. 

X Iowa Station Bulletin 14, 1891. 

II Wisconsin Station Annual Report 18S6, pp. 115 and 130. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 25 

Woll,* in comparing the feeding value of ground oats and bran 
for milk production, found that " the cows invariably did better 
on oats, going up in milk yield when coming on oats and going 
down when bran was fed, while the fat content of the milk 
remained the same on an average." 

Linfieldf studied the effect of two rations varying in nutritive 
ratio on the per cent of fat in milk ^ith ten cows during eight 
periods of three weeks each. He concludes, " this test adds but 
another item to the fairly well established fact that an increase 
in the quantity of concentrated food in the ration of a cow, does 
not increase the richness of the milk provided the cows are well 
fed to start with." 

Dean;j; carried on experiments during several years to ascertain 
the effect of food on the quality and quantity of milk. The 
results obtained from feeding coarse fodder with and without 
grain, from comparing pasturage with and without grain, from 
feeding slop, and from other experiments, generally agree with 
this statement made in Bulletin No. 80, that" the general con- 
clusion would seem to be that the food does not effect the quality 
of the milk to any appreciable extent so long as the animals are 
in good condition." 

Speir [[ reports as least three different experiments on the effect 
of foods on milk production. He tested a large number of dif- 
ferent kinds of feeding stuffs both singly and in various combina- 
tions during periods of four to five weeks in length. Some of 
his conclusions are that " an increase of oil in the food does not 
seem to give any increase of fat in the milk. Rations having an 
extremely high albuminoid ratio seem to have a depressing effect 
on the milk yield, well mixed foods giving the best results in this 
respect. Every food when first given, seems to have more or 
less effect in increasing or decreasing the percentage of fat in the 
milk. This effect, however, is transitory and the milk returns 
to its normal composition about the end of the first week." 

* Wisconsin Station Annual Report 1S90, p. 65. 

t Utah Station, Bulletin 43, 1S95. 

:}: Ontario Agricultural College and Farm Report 1891, p. 154; 1893, p. 
148 ; 1894, pp. 147 and 148. 

II Transactions of the Highland and Agricultural Society, Scotland, 1S94, 
p. 83 ; 1896, p. 269 ; 1897, p. 296. 



26 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

Stohtnan,*in experimenting with goats found that the fat 
content of the milk was proportional to the fat content of the 
fodder, but that by a great increase in the nitrogenous foods, the 
milk-fat did not increase in the same way as when the fat con- 
tent of the food was increased. 

Kiihnf carried on extensive feeding trials with bean meal, 
palm nut cake and malt sprouts, having in all 42 experiments 
with 10 cows. The feeding periods varied from 21 to 47 days in 
length. The grains were fed separately in addition to a normal 
ration and in quantities of 1.5, 2 and 3 kilograms per head daily. 
According to his results the fat content of the milk increased 
proportionately with the increase of protein fed, but did not 
decrease in the same proportion when the protein in the food was 
decreased. He concludes "that the palm nut cake exerted on 
the whole a favorable influence upon milk production and espec- 
ially upon the fat content of the milk. " The bean meal and 
malt sprouts did not have a like favorable effect. He found that 
the addition of one-half kilogram of oil to the ration increased 
the quantity and quality of the milk. But he considered " that 
this added fat had no direct influence on milk production ; that 
it has an indirect effect in this manner : that a certain quantity 
of protein is thereby made available for milk production which 
before the feeding of the fat was used in sustaining the animal 
body, but the fat now performs this office and permits the pro- 
tein to be used for producing milk. " He concludes also " that 
these experiments, according to all observations, prove in the 
clearest manner how greatly the milk production, and the possi- 
bility of influencing arbitrarily through feeding the amount or 
composition of the product, are dependent upon the individuality 
of the animal. " 

Heinrich \ compared peanut cake with cocoanut cake, the lat- 
ter ration containing 350 grams more fat than the former. The 
rations were alternated in periods of four weeks each and three 
cows were used. He found that the fat of the milk was consid- 
erably increased both in percentage and total amount, when the 



* Journal fiir Landwirtschaft, 1S6S, pp. 135, 307 and 420. 

fvSame, 25, (1S77), p. 332. 

:):Abs. in Experiment Station Record 3 (1891), p. 67. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 27 

cocoanut ration was fed, but there was much difference in the 
animals regarding this point. It is his opinion that the increased 
yield of fat may be accounted for by the increased amount of fat 
in the food. 

Kochs and Ramm * fed three cows during four periods of about 
four weeks each, on rations which contained practically the same 
amounts of dry matter, and nearly equal amounts of digestible 
non-nitrogenous matter, but the amount of protein fed was such 
as to make the nutritive ratio vary from 1:8.19 to 1:5 42 to 1:4.31 
and to 1:8.19 in the successive periods. They found that "the 
proportional fat content of the milk remained unchanged by the 
very wide changes in the food. " 

Klein t found that the addition of sunflower cake to the usual 
ration of four cows was followed by an increased milk yield, 
while it seemed to have no specific effect on the fat content of 
the milk. 

Maercker and Morgen J report a series of cooperative experi- 
ments with farmers in which the effect of watery foods on milk 
secretion was studied. Beet diffusion residue (beet pulp) was 
fed alone and also with potato residue (from starch manufact- 
ure) in addition to a basal ration of hay, straw and grain. The 
amounts of residue fed daily were such as to give quantities of 
water ranging from 43 to 150 pounds per head. The experi- 
mental periods were ten days each. They found that the quan- 
tity of milk increased regularly with the increase of watery food 
up to 116 pounds, and that the increase in watery food was with- 
out discernible effect upon the composition of the milk. 

Juretschke || has found as a result of the addition of 4 to 5 
pounds, per thousand pounds live weight, of cottonseed cake, 
rape cake, and peanut cake to a basal ration consisting of hay, 
straw, brewers' grains and wheat bran, that the " milk secretion 
is not directly but only indirectly affected by feeding and that 
the feeding of large amounts of fat does not increase the amount 
of butter-fat in the milk." 



* Landwirtschaftliche Jahrbiicber 21 (1892) p, 809. 
t Milch Zeitung 21 (1892) p. 673. 

X Abs. in Experiment Station Record, 3 (1892) p. 557. 
I Molkerei Zeitung 7 (1893) p. 518. 



28 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

Backhaus * found by feeding ten cows on a basal ration of hay, 
straw, brewers' grains, etc., and alternating in periods of two 
weeks with peanut cake, palm nut cake and cottonseed oil cake, 
that in order to bring about changes in the fat content of milk 
very little can be accomplished by the kind of food, and that the 
favorable effect of some concentrated foods which have been 
found to increase the fat takes place only when large quantities 
are fed, 

Soxhletf reports some investigations on the production of 
milk richer in fat. He says nothing of the plan or extent of his 
experiments and gives nothing but the conclusions and a discus- 
sion of theories. As compared with hay alone, the addition of 
fourteen pounds of starch, treated with malt and given as a 
sweet drink, with sixteen pounds of hay made no appreciable 
increase in milk yield but a noticeable decrease (about 0.7 per 
cent) in fat. The fat content was practically the same when four 
pounds of rice gluten containing 71 per cent of protein was fed 
as when hay was fed alone. When sesame oil, linseed oil or 
tallow was added to the ration in the form of emulsions thoroughly 
mixed with the drinking water, the milk contained as high as 
5.8 per cent of fat. When 1.5 to 2 pounds of linseed oil were 
added to 18 to 22 pounds of hay the milk averaged 5.24 per cent 
of fat for four days ; when i to 2 pounds of tallow were added 
to the same amount of hay the milk contained from 4.24 to 5.5 
per cent of fat, the average for eight days being 4.7 per cent. 
The author believes that the addition of oils to the ration in the 
form of emulsions will increase the per cent of fat in the milk 
while the addition of the same oils in other forms will not so 
increase it, because the oils are more easily digested in the form 
of emulsion. He does not believe that the fat of the food goes 
directly into the milk, but that it forces the body fat, i. e. tallow, 
over into the milk, and thus indirectly increases the quantity of 
milk-fat. He further states that the fat of the food alone, and 
not the protein or carbohydrates, is capable of bringing about a 
one-sided increase in the fat content of the milk. 



* Journal fiir Landwirtschaft 41 (1893) p. 328. 

f Abs. Experiment Station Record, 8 (1897), p. 1016. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 29 

Beglarian * studied the effect of linseed oil, given in water as 
an emulsion and of ground flaxseed with four cows during four 
periods of^eight days each. The cows shrank in milk yield while 
•taking the oil ration and increased on the flaxseed ration. The 
author considers the results entirely negative since the oil was 
not accompanied by an appreciable rise in the fat content, while 
it had an unfavorable effect on the digestion and comfort of the 
cows. The ground flaxseed had no effect on the quality of the 
milk and a less unfavorable influence on the animal's digestion. 

Holtsmark f found that feeding cows as much as 77 pounds of 
turnips per head daily in connection with a liberal ration of con- 
centrated feed and cut straw, caused no decrease in the fat con- 
tent of the herd milk, as compared with the feeding of the regular 
ration of hay, straw, concentrated feed and a small quantity of 
roots. 

Ramm,J to study the effect of different foods on milk product- 
tion gave ten cows a basal ration consisting of 14 kg. of hay, 6 
kg. straw and 50 kg. of beets, to which, for periods of ten days 
each, he added separately eighteen different foods. He found 
much variation in the fat content of the milk but no marked 
increase except with palm nut cake (7.91 kg.) alone and with a 
mixture of equal parts (8.25 kg.) of palm nut cake and beet 
molasses, this mixture being accompanied with a higher per cent 
of fat and total fat in the milk than any other food. For this 
reason the author thinks molasses has a greater effect on the 
quality of milk than palm nut cake. He found no relation 
between the fat content of the milk and the fat content of the 
food. 

In a later experiment, Ramm made further comparison of the 
feeding value of various molasses mixtures. The mixtures used 
were peat molasses (80 per cent molasses and 20 per cent peat), 
liquid molasses, equal parts of molasses and palm nut meal, 
molasses pulp (molasses mixed with fresh potato pulp and dried), 
molasses chips (fresh beet pulp and molasses mixed and dried), 
barley meal and palm nut cake of average quality. The basal 



* Milch Zeitung 26 (1897) p. 522. 

f Abs. in Experiment Station Record, 9 (1897) p. 92, by F. W. Woll. 

:j: Landwirtschaftliche Jahrbiicher 26 ( 1897) pp. 693, 731. 



30 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

ration consisted of hay, straw and beets. There were seven 
experimental periods of 20 days each, the last five days only 
being used in comparison. Eight cows were used. He found 
the barley meal to excel the molasses preparations for milk pro- 
duction, but concludes that the latter induce an increase in the 
fat content of the milk. 

Winternitz* fed a goat on sesame oil mixed with a small 
amount of iodin. He found a portion of the iodin was absorbed 
by the milk-fat and thus concludes that a direct transmission of 
the fat of the food into the milk may take place. 

Albert and Maerckerf studied the effect of rations rich and 
poor in fat, on ten cows during six periods ranging from 7 to 18 
days, with preliminary periods ranging from 2 to 16 days in 
length. The amount of protein in the rations was kept constant 
while the fat was increased from .297 kilograms to 1.706 kilo- 
grams per head daily. They found that the feeding of such 
large amounts of fat increased the percentage of fat in the milk, 
but reduced the yield so much as to make such feeding unprofit- 
able. 

Kellner and Andra J compared sugar beets with dried and 
ensiled beet diffusion residue by feeding them alternately to 
twenty-four cows during four periods of twenty days each. They 
found that " the substitution of 4.4 kg. of dried diffusion residue 
for 27.5 kg. of sugar beets increased the milk yield .953 kg. and 
the substitution of 41.8 kg. of ensiled diffusion residue for the 
above amount of sugar beets increased the milk yield 1.721 kg. 
per cow (of 550 kg. live weight) without causing any material 
change in the qualit}- of the milk," 

Friis II reviews the cooperative cow feeding experiments con- 
ducted by the Experiment Station at Copenhagen, Denmark, 
since 1888, with especial reference to the effect of food on the 
fat content of the milk. The summary of 76 series of experi- 
ments is given. The rations used were such as could be regarded 
normal for milch cows, such as are met with in the feeding prac- 



*Zeitschrift PhysioL Chem. 24 (1898) p. 425, 

f Landwirtschaftliche Jahrbiicher 27 (1898) p. 18S. 

X Landwirtschaftliche Versuchs Stationen 49 (189S) p. 402. 

II Abs. in Experiment vStation Record 10 (1898) p. 86, by F. W. Woll. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 31 

tice on Danish dairy farms. The question whether abnormal feed 
mixtures can appreciably change the fat content of milk was not 
included in the investigation. The author says " it was found 
that different feeding stuffs and food mixtures in a very large 
measure influence the quantity of milk yielded as well as the 
health and general condition of the cows. The feed under prac- 
tical conditions as found in this countfy, exerts an entirely insig- 
nificant influence on the fat content of the milk." 

Rhodin * emulsified linseed oil is a specially constructed 
machine and fed from 250 to 750 grams of the emulsion daily as 
a drink in water to each of two cows during seven-day periods in 
addition to a normal mixed ration. During the first periods of 
feeding the oil, the fat content of the milk was increased, but 
during the third period the per cent of fat not only ceased to 
increase, but fell back to the same point as before the oil was 
was fed. 

Ramm and Winthropf made a comparison of some new feed- 
ing stuffs using five cows for six mouths. The foods were corn 
bran, cocoa-molasses (hot molasses and finely ground cocoa shells), 
blood, molasses (blood, molasses and refuse of cereals) and 
molasses distillery refuse (residue from manufacture of 
alcohol from beet molasses). They found a wide fluctuation 
in the fat content of the milk during different periods and believe 
that the molasses increased the fat content wherever it was fed, 
while the corn bran seemed to reduce the fat content. When 
feeding rations rich in fat they could see no relation between the 
fat content of the ration and the fat content of the milk. 

Ramm and Momsen | report an experiment in which five cows 
were fed for four periods of four days each (preceded by prelim- 
inary periods) a basal ration of hay, straw, roots and peanut 
meal. In addition, molasses was fed during the first and fourth 
periods, raw sugar during the second period, and raw sugar and 
molasses distillery residue during the third period, — the sugar 
content of the three rations being the same. The cows 
produced the most milk and the least butter fat when fed the 



* Milch Zeituiig 27 (1898) pp. 306 and 323. 
t Same, 27 (1898) p. 513. 
:}:Same, 29 (1900) 28, p. 433. 



32 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



sugar ration, and the most fat and solids when fed the sugar and 
molasses distillery residue. The content of fat and solids in the 
milk produced on the molasses ration was respectively, 3.20 and 
11.65 per cent, on the sugar ration 2.84, and 11.32 per cent, and 
on the sugar and molasses residue ration 3.39 and 12,06 per cent. 
The results are therefore considered as showing that molasses 
has a greater feeding value for dairy cows than sugar, and that 
the constituents in molasses other than sugar are especially val- 
uable in the production of butter fat. 

Hagemann * conducted some experiments to determine whether 
a fat rich fodder produces a fat rich milk. During five periods, 
varying in length from 21 to 35 days, he fed two cows on rations 
containing from 175 to 720 grams of fat. In addition to a basal 
ration the grains added were corn meal, linseed-oil meal, malt 
sprouts and peanut cake mixed with cocoa molasses. In the 
sixth period of seven days he gave i.i pounds of sesame oil to 
each cow daily as an emulsion in drinking water. He concludes 
that " the proportional and absolute fat content of milk is not 
dependent upon the amount of fat in the food." 

The reports of forty-nine separate experiments have been herein 
reviewed. They may be classified in the following manner in 
answering to the question : Was the percentage of fat in the 
milk increased by the food given the cows ? 



Feeding fat 

Feeding protein and mixed foods. 

Feeding watery foods 

Feeding molasses preparations . . 
Total 



13 



22 
2 



32 



A tendency 

to 

increase 



Of the six experiments where the fat in the food increased the 
proportion of milk-fat, one reports so great a reduction in the 
yield as to make such feeding unprofitable. The noted experi- 
ment of Soxhlet whereby he increased the per cent of milk-fat 
by feeding the cows oil emulsified in the drinking water, has 
been repeated many times by other experimenters, but only one 
of them, so far as we know, has reached a similar result. The 



* Landwirtschaf tliche Jahrbiicher 28 (1S99) p. 485. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 33 

protein foods which increased the per cent of fat were palm-nut 
meal and sugar meal. The molasses preparations may owe their 
power to increase the fat content of milk to their rather abnormal 
character. 

Experiments at Cornell University 

These experiments were conducted for the purpose of deter- 
mining the comparative effect of rations having different nutritive 
ratios upon milk production. This question has been the sub- 
ject of experimentation at various times and places as has been 
already noticed, but further investigation along possibly differ- 
ent lines may throw more light upon the problem. Much dis- 
cussion has occurred over the matter of the length of time dur- 
ing which a particular food should be tested and as to the accuracy 
of conclusions drawn from feeding trials where two or more foods 
were given during brief alternating periods. Some contend that 
four or five weeks is sufficient time in which to secure the true 
effect of a food, some think that a shorter time, even ten days, is 
enough, while others hold that the longer the period the more 
accurate and conclusive the result. It is well known that, when 
a radical change is made in the food of a cow, the secretion of 
milk is greatly affected. This is most apparent in the fat con- 
tent, which may either rise or fall, but is more apt to rise. How 
long the fluctuation may continue depends upon the ability of the 
cow to accustom herself to the new feed, which time may be 
only a few days or it may be weeks. And when the cow has 
become accustomed to the changed feed, her milk falls back to 
its normal average composition. However, if the experiment is 
concluded before this time, or if the feed is again changed, then 
conclusions drawn therefrom must be more or less warped. 

In order that these sources of error might be obviated, these 
experiments were not only continued for a long period, but no 
changes were made in the kinds of foods given during the whole 
time. The feeding trials lasted through two successive winters 
and for a period of twenty-two weeks during each winter. The 
effect of the different rations was studied by comparing the 
influence of each upon the average milk production of the cows 
used. We think this method to be satisfactory because, in the 
first place, the cows were so selected as to make the different lots 



34 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

fairly equal as to age, breed and general characteristics : and in 
the second place, if a given ration will produce any particular 
effect upon milk production, then this ration will show its influ- 
ence on the average composition of the milk from the lot of 
cows to which it is fed when compared with the average compo- 
sition of milk from other cows on other rations. 

This study is confined to the yield of milk and its quality so 
far as represented bj^ the percentage of butter-fat. The deter- 
minations of fat were made by the Babcock test from samples 
of milk taken from each cow during the last three days of each 
week. These daily samples were tested separately and their 
average taken for the average per cent of fat in the week's milk. 
Each cow's milk was weighed as soon as drawn and the weekly 
yield of milk multiplied by the average percent of fat gives the 
total fat produced during the week. 

The rations fed were of three kinds, one with a narrow, one 
with a medium, and the third with a wide nutritive ratio. No 
analyses of foods were made except of the oat chop which was 
fed during the first year. The amount of dr}' substance and the 
nutritive ratio were calculated largeh' from the average compo- 
sition of feeding stuffs given in Bulletin No. ii of the Office of 
Experiment Stations. 

With one exception the same cows were used throughout the 
two years of experiment. Moreover the same cows were fed 
rations having practicallj^ the same nutritive ratio though made 
up of different foods during both years, i. e. the cows receiving 
a narrow ration the first year also received a narrow ration the 
second year and likewise with the cows on other rations. None 
of the rations are what would be called unusual, for similar ones 
may be found in use on dairy farms in various parts of the coun- 
try. During the whole length of both experiments it was the 
aim to give the cows all the food they could readily consume. 

The records as published contain only the average data obtained 
from each lot of cows. In work of this kind, the average record 
of several cows is of more value than individual records taken 
singly, and it is from the average record that conclusions must 
be drawn. For this reason and in order to eliminate many long 
tables from these pages, the individual records are not published. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



35 



The First Experiment, 1895-6. 

This feeding trial began Nov. 6, 1895, and continued for 
twenty-two weeks until Apr. 7, 1896. It was conducted by 
James M. Johnson then a graduate student in the College of Agri- 
culture. The names of the cows used are given below together 
with their br'eed, age, number of days in milk and weight. 



Name and breed. 



Lot a : 
GarnetValentine A.J.C.C.,73873 

Belva 2d, }| Holstein 

Julia, I Holstein 

Lot B : 

Chern-, grade Jersey 

Dora, \f Holstein 

Glista 4th H. F. H. B., 31408 
Lot C : 

Clara, grade Jersey 

Glista Netherland, H.F. H.B 
32442 

May 2d, | Holstein 



Age. 


Number 
of days 
in milk. 


Weight 
begin- 
ning. 


Weight 
end. 


Gain. 


4 

2 


67 
49 


S73 
891 


922 
1088 


119 

197 


4 


25 


II96 


1370 


174 


2 

4 


49 
62 


721 
1 146 


849 
1213 


128 
67 


3 


65 


1064 


1239 


175 


3 


65 


922 


1063 


141 


3 


16 


1038 


II27 


89 


3 


54 


I017 


1223 


206 



The daily rations of the cows in each lot were made up as 
follows : 
Lot a : 

Grain mixture 8 to 13 pounds. 

Gluten feed 3 parts. 

Oat chop 2 parts. 

Cottonseed meal 2 parts. 

Linseed oil meal i part. 

Corn silage 40 to 45 pounds. 

Clover hay 8 to 10 pounds. 

Nutritive ratio 1 14.5 

Lot B : 

Grain Mixture 8 to 10 pounds. 

Gluten feed 2 parts. 

Oat chop 3 parts. 

Corn meal 1 part. 

Linseed oil meal i part. 

Corn silage 35 to 45 pounds. 

Clover hay 4 to 10 pounds. 

Nutritive ratio 1:6 

Lot C : 

Grain mixture 8 to 10 pounds. 

Oat chop 4 parts. 

Corn meal : 4 parts. 

Linseed oil meal i part. 

Corn silage 35 to 40 pounds. 

Timothy hay 4 to 8 pounds. 

Nutritive ratio 1:9 



36 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



Calculating each of these rations on the basis of 8 pounds of 
grain, 8 pounds of hay and 40 pounds of silage, each cow would 
receive the following number of pounds of digestible nutrients 
per day : 





Protein. 


Carbo- 
hydrates. 


Fat. 


Nutritive 
ratio. 


lyOt A, narrow ration 


2.90 
2.25 
1.60 


10.78 
II. 61 
12.68 


1.09 
•91 

.75 


1:4-5 
1:6.0 
1.9.0 


Lot B, medium ration 

Lot C, wide ration 





Beginning with Dec. 14, each cow received 5 pounds of man- 
gel-wurtzels per day in addition to the above rations. 

Table I contains the average record of consumption of food 
and production of milk and fat for each of the three lots of cows 
named above. The data given includes the weekly average con- 
sumption of dry matter per head, the average daily consumption 
per 1000 pounds live weight, the nutritive ratio, the average 
weekly yield of milk and fat and the average per cent of fat. 

TABLE I— 1895-6 
Average Record of Lot a. (Narrow Ration) 







1 


Weekly product of milk and fat. 1 


Week. 


Dry matter consumed. j 


Av 


erage per head, 


Per head 


Per 1000 lbs. 


Nutritive 


Pounds of 




Pounds of 




weekly. 


daily. 


Ratio. 


milk. 


Per cent fat. 


fat. 


I 


159-46 


23-34 


1:4-53 


219.50 


3-64 


7.98 


2 


164.01 


23-59 


1:4.50 


221.33 


3 


20 


7.08 


3 


164,71 


23.66 


1:4.50 


220 92 


3 


35 


7.41 


4 


166.27 


23.24 


1:4.51 


208.67 


3 


55 


7.41 


5 


170.55 


23.46 


1:4.43 


202.42 


3 


52 


7.13 


6 


171.19 


23.26 


1:4.38 


200.33 


3 


42 


6.85 


7 


17505 


23-65 


1:4-35 


196.33 


3 


22 


6.36 


8 


177-32 


23.72 


1:4 32 


199.00 


3 


39 


6.75 


9 


170.55 


22.61 


14.28 


191.00 


3 


31 


6.32 


10 


171. II 


22.64 


1:4.29 


195.67 


3 


23 


6.32 


II 


171.96 


22.74 


1:4.29 


197.08 


3 


39 


6.68 


12 


174.19 


22.92 


1:4.24 


191.25 


3 


26 


6.24 


13 


173.20 


22.74 


1:4.20 


191.08 


3 


47 


6.63 


14 


178.43 


23.48 


1:4.26 


183.75 


3 


60 


6.62 


l.S 


180.12 


23.58 


1:4-27 


184.42 


3 


61 


6.67 


16 


180.97 


23-55 


1:4 28 


191-33 


3 


50 


6.74 


17 


180.69 


23-37 


1:4.28 


186.42 


3 


53 


659 


18 


176.73 


22.68 


1:4.25 


169.50 


3 


53 


5-9S 


19 


177-44 


22.57 


1:4.26 


176.83 


3 


86 


683 


20 


178.71 


22.56 


1:4.23 


177-17 


3 


63 


6.44 


21 


179 13 


22.45 


1:4.27 


166.83 


3 


60 


6.01 


22 


179.16 


22.26 ' 14.27 1 


166.67 


3 


62 


6.04 



TABLE I— ( Continued) 
Average Record of Lot B. (Medium Ration) 



■ 


Dry matter consumed. 


Weekly product of milk and fat. 
Average per head. 
















Per head 


Per 1000 lbs. 


Nutritive 


Pounds of 




Pounds of 




vveekriy. 


daily. 


1 ratio. 


milk. 


Per cent fat. 


fat. 


I 


162.25 


24.03 




6.12 


1S7.50 


3-35 


6.27 


2 


161.42 


23.70 




6.II 


191.42 


3-33 


6.37 


3 


161.55 


23-56 




6.11 


182.50 


338 


6.17 


4 


162.26 


23-57 




6.12 


180.75 


3-58 


6.47 


5 


165.52 


23-77 




6.05 


175-75 


3-19 


5.61 


6 


167.28 


23.81 




6.03 


166.50 


3-44 


5-73 


7 


171.70 


24-^5 




5-97 


177-75 


3.28 


5-82 


8 


173.29 


24.16 




5-94 


167.58 


3-i6 


5-30 


9 


167.81 


23-53 




5.89 


164.75 


3-05 


5.02 


lO 


163.72 


22.66 




5.89 


167.33 


3-07 


5-14 


II 


171.23 


23-51 




5.96 


169.25 


3 45 


5-84 


12 


168.72 


23-14 




5.96 


164.92 


3-32 


5-48 


13 


170.II 


23.29 




5-95 


165.67 


3.32 


5-49 


14 


168.18 


23-05 




5.88 


152-83 


3.40 


5.20 


15 


169.63 


23-47 




5-93 


154.08 • 


3.60 


5-55 


i6 


173.43 


23-44 




5-95 


162.83 


3.50 


5- 70 


17 


174.34 


23-49 




5.96 


159-17 


3-52 


5.60 


i8 


173.46 


23.21 




5-96 


156.50 


3-59 


5-61 


19 


173.21 


23.00 




5.96 


152.67 


3-73 


5-69 


20 


173-77 


22.91 




5.96 


154-67 


3-53 


5.46 


21 


174.48 


22.86 




5-96 


146,42 


3-51 


5.14 


22 


173-35 


22.50 




5-96 


125-33 


3-84 


4.81 





Average Record of Lot C. (Wide Ration) 






Dry 


matter consumed. 


Weekly product of milk and fat. 
Average per head. 












Per head 


Per 1000 lbs. 


Nutritive 


Pounds of 




Pounds of 




weekly. 


daily. 


ratio. 


milk. 


Per cent fat. 


fat. 


I 


150.20 


21.56 


1:8.79 


180.83 


3-31 


5-99 


* 2 


149.62 


21.28 


1:8.78 


177.92 


3.20 


5.69 


3 


145.43 


20.52 


1:8.73 


173-S3 


3-54 


6.16 


4 


146.73 


20.49 


1:8.73 


166.75 


3-55 


5-92 


5 


151.28 


2095 


1:8.65 


162.00 


3-37 


5-46 


6 


147-63 


20.35 


1:8.43 


152.67 


3-43 


5-24 


7 


150.14 


20.50 


1:8.30 


164.25 


3.08 


5.06 


8 


147.16 


19-93 


1:8.19 


164.92 


3.22 


5.31 


9 


148.75 


20.07 


1:8.22 


145-25 


3-74 


5-43 


10 


146.44 


19.62 


1:8.18 


154.92 


3-25 


5-03 


II 


151-65 


20.17 


1:8.27 


154.25 


3.30 


5.08 


12 


146.15 


19.33 


1:8.16 


153.42 


3-31 


5.08 


13 


147.62 


1945 


1:8.21 


153.67 


3-37 


5.18 


14 


146.49 


19.21 


1:8.19 


147-75 


3-21 


4.75 


15 


147.31 


19.27 


1:8.19 


143.17 


3.60 


5.15 


16 


154.39 


20.16 


1:8.33 


146.83 


3-45 


5.07 


17 


156.13 


20.33 1:8.36 1 


14633 


3-29 


4.82 


18 


156.13 


20.29 


1:8.36 


142.75 


3-52 


5.02 


19 


157-72 


20.33 


1:8.39 


139.92 


3-87 


5.42 


20 


158.73 


20.26 


1:8.41 


141.67 


3.58 


507 


21 


160 76 


20.32 


1:8.45 


136.50 


3-65 


4-98 


22 


161. 01 


20.56 


1 :8.46 


135-33 


3-63 


4.91 



38 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



The Second Experiment, 1896-7 
This feeding trial continued for twenty-two weeks from Nov. 
II, 1896, to Apr. 13, 1897, ^^^ was conducted by the writer. 
The names of the cows used are given below together with their 
breed, age, number of days in milk and weight. It will be 
noticed that these cows are the same that were in the first experi- 
ment with the exception of Jennie 2d, in lot C who took the 
place of Glista Netherland. 



Name and breed. 



Lot a : 
Garnet Valentine, A. J. C.C. 73873 

Belva 2d, jf Holstein 

Julia, 7^ Holstein . . . , 

Lot B : 
Cherry, grade Jersey 

Dora, II Holstein 

Glista 4th, H. F. H. B. 31408... 
Lot C : 
Clara, grade Jersey 



Jennie 2d, Jersej'-Holstein. 
May 2d, JA Hols'tein 





Number 


Weight 






Age. 


of days 


begin- 


end. 


Gain. 




in milk. 


ning. 




5 


74 


920 


1020 


100 


3 


50 


IOI2 


1200 


188 


5 


62 


1247 


1333 


106 


3 


54 
Calved 


809 


928 


119 


5 


Nov. 20 


I181 


1213 


32 


4 


60 


II37 


1289 


152 


4 


68 
Calved 


1030 


1062 


32 


3 ' 


Nov. 8 


857 


952 


95 


4 


44 


1 124 


1191 


67 



The daily rations of the cows in each lot were made up as 
follows : 
Lot a : 

Grain mixture 8 to 1 2 pounds. 

Gluten feed 3 parts. 

Cottonseed meal 2 parts. 

Wheat bran i part. 

Corn silage 35 to 45 pounds. 

Clover hay 6 to 12 pounds. 

Nutritive ratio i :4.3 

Lot B : 

Grain mixture 8 to 1 2 pounds. 

Gluten feed 2 parts. 

Corn meal 2 parts. 

Wheat bran 2 parts. 

Linseed oil meal i part. 

Corn silage 35 to 45 pounds. 

Clover hay 6 to 1 2 pounds. 

Nutritive ratio i :5.7 

Lot C : 

Grain mixture 8 to 11 pounds. 

Corn meal 2 parts. 

Wheat bran i part. 

Corn silage 35 to 40 pounds. 

Timothy hay 4 to 8 pounds. 

Nutritive ratio 1 19. 3 



* 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



39 



Calculating each of these rations on the basis of 8 pounds 
of 'grain, 8 pounds of hay, and 40 pounds of silage, each 
cow would receive the following number of pounds of digestible 
nutrients per day. 





Protein. 


Carbo- 
hydrates. 


Fat. 


Nutritive 
ratio. 


Lot A, narrow ration 

Lot B, medium ration 

Lot C, wide ration 


3.08 
2.37 
1.56 


-10.63 
11.67 
12.96 


I-I3 

.87 
.67 


I ■■4-3 
1:5-7 
1:9-3 



Beginning with Jan. 6, each cow was fed five pounds of man- 
gel- wurtzels per day, which amount was increased to 10 pounds 
in a few days and so continued until the close of the experiment. 

Table II contains the average record of consumption of food 
and production of milk and fat for each of the three lots of cows 
named above. The data given includes the weekly average con- 
sumption of dry matter per head, the average daily consump- 
tion per 1000 pounds live weight, the nutritive ratio, the 
average weekly yield of milk and fat and average per cent of fat. 

TABLE II— 1896-7. 
Average Record of Lot A. (Narrow Ration.) 







1 


Weekly product of milk and fat. | 


Week. 


Dry matter consumed. 1 


Average per hes 


d. 


Per head 


Per 1000 lbs. 


Nutritive 


Pounds of 




Pounds of 




weekly. 


daily. 


ratio. 


milk. 


Per cent fat. 


fat. 


I 


167.19 


22.63 


1:4.15 


184.42 


3-37 


6.21 


2 


169.34 


22.53 


1:4.11 


188.33 


3-31 


6.24 


3 


172.81 


22.67 


1:4.11 


187-75 


3-27 


6.14 


4 


172.98 


22.32 


1:4.00 


178.25 


3-44 


6.13 


5 


169.36 


21.82 


1:394 


177.08 


3-21 


5.64 


6 


17530 


22.48 


1:4.01 


176.17 


3.20 


5.64 


7 


176.12 


22.47 


1:4.03 


166.50 


3-25 


5.41 


8 


1 78. 18 


22.61 


1 :4.04 


169.92 


3.08 


5-24 


9 


163.61 


20.50 


1:3.98 


153-33 


3.26 


5.00 


10 


142.36 


18.59 


1:4.12 


i5o.5» 


3-37 


5-08 


11 


169.11 


21.52 


1 :4-03 


161.75 


327 


5.28 


12 


163.36 


20.74 


1:3.96 


152.08 


3.17 


4:82 


13 


169.52 


21.56 


1:3-95 


147.92 


3.15 


4.66 


14 


171-13 


21.55 


1:3.90 


156 83 


3.34 


5.23 


15 


173.60 


21.76 


1:3-93 


155-67 


3.26 


5.08 


16 


178.23 


22.07 


1:3.92 


' 150.58 


3-22 


4.85 


17 


182.63 


22.51 


1:3.94 


152.25 


3.21 


4.88 


18 


179.27 


2f-93 


1 :3 93 


i 151. 17 


341 


5-15 


19 


176.46 


21.52 


1:3.92 


148.83 


332 


4-94 


20 


174.74 


21.16 


1:3 9f 


148.58 


3-31 


4.92 


21 


175.69 


21.20 


1:3.91 


150.75 


3-37 


5-09 


22 


174.61 


20.87 


1:3.90 


143-50 


3.36 


4.83 



TABLE \\— {Continued) 
Average Record of Lot B. (Medium Ration) 









Weekly p 


roduct of milk and fat. 1 


Week. 


Dry 


matter consumed. 


" Average per head. 1 


Per head 
weekly. 


Per 1000 lbs. 
daily. 


Nutritive 
ratio. 


Pounds of 
milk. 


Per cent fat. 


Pounds of 
fat. 


I 


*l62.22 


23.96 


1:5-58 


*i82.75 


3-67 


6.72 


2 


*l64.89 


23.76 


1:5-54 


*i89.25 


4.04 


7-64 


3 


*i66.i5 


23-44 


1:5-54 


*i8[.75 


3-83 


6-97 


4 


164.90 


21.87 


1:559 


221.08 


3-84 


8.50 


5 


169.20 


22.42 


1:5-53 


227-33 


3-43 


7-79 


6 


164.48 


21.80 


1:5-54 


195-17 


3-98 


7.77 


7 


170.53 


22.53 


1:5-56 


204.25 


3-63 


7-42 


8 


175-99 


23.20 


1:5-59 


214-92 


3-34 


7.19 


9 


177.14 


23-37 


1:5-94 


217.42 


3.42 


7.42 


lO 


180.81 


23.87 


1:5-93 


216.16 


3.36 


7.26 


II 


176.58 


23-32 


1:5.46 


210.33 


3-51 


7.38 


12 


]66.oi 


21.85 


1:5.42 


201.50 


340 


6.89 


13 


175-91 


23.27 


1:5-47 


204.58 


3-47 


7.09 


14 


i7«-59 


23-14 


1:5.46 


207.08 


3.51 


7.27 


15 


184.10 


23.92 


1:547 


215.92 


3-50 


7.55 


i6 


186.78 


24.03 


1:5-47 


205.17 


3-57 


7-33 


17 


186.35 


23-75 


1:5-47 


208.42 


3-43 


7-16 


i8 


186.92 


23-73 


1:5.47 


214.42 


3-45 


7-39 


19 


182.40 


23.09 


1:5.46 


209.00 


3-65 


7.63 


20 


181.98 


22.94 


1:5.46 


208.33 


3-41 


7.11 


21 


1S1.27 


22.76 


1:5.46 


202.25 


3.62 


7-33 


22 


181.55 


22.65 1:5-46 1 


199-83 


3-55 


7.09 





Average Record of Lot 


C. (Wide 


Ration) 






Dry 


matter consumed. 


Weekly product of milk and fat. 
Average per head. 














Per head 


Per 1000 lbs. 


Nutritive 


Pounds of 




Pounds of 




weekly. 


daily. 


ratio. 


milk. 


Per cent fat. 


fat. 


1 


*I29.38 


17-37 




8.87 


*I79-75 


3-63 


6.53 


2 


141.92 


20.56 




9.02 


189.08 


3-96 


7-49 


3 


147-75 


21.21 




899 


186.25 


3-95 


7.36 


4 


144-32 


20.71 




8.95 


174.17 


4.09 


7.12 


5 


135-80 


19-52 




8-79 


169.92 


3-89 


6.61 


6 


149-93 


21.48 




9.08 


169.33 


3-78 


6.39 


7 


153-89 


21.97 




9.12 


156.75 


3.63 


6.18 


8 


156.10 


22.23 




9-15 


169.42 


3-73 


6.32 


9 


155.15 


22.12 




8.90 


167.50 


3.99 


6.68 


10 


158.99 


22.56 




8.76 


161.42 


4.05 


6.54 


II 


158.09 


22.37 




8-75 


160.92 


4.06 


6.53 


12 


152.95 


21-53 




8.75 


157.08 


4.10 


6.44 


13 


159.51 


22.42 




8.80 


155.83 


4.06 


6.32 


14 


J58.27 


22.04 




8.69 


! 157.42 


4.06 


6.39 


15 


159.68 


22.44 




8.69 


158.33 


3-99 


6.32 


16 


152.38 


20.90 




8.55 


147-92 


4.18 


6.18 


17 


154 93 


21.04 




8-56 


X53-42 


4.06 


6.23 


18 


157.59 


21.37 




8.61 


i 151-67 


4.06 


6.16 


19 


151-51 


20.40 




851 


146 25 


4.16 


6.08 


20 


*i6o.5o 


21.62 




8-53 


' *i6i.38 


3.64 


5-88 



* Average for two cows. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 41 

Before entering upon any discussion of these records it is 
necessary to make a few explanations in order that a clear 
understanding of them may be obtained. The first experiment 
went through without any irregularities, or illness of the cows, 
sufficient to cause variations that should be noticed when draw- 
ing conclusions. But during the second experiment there were 
some irregularities that need to be noticed. 

In lot A, Table II, Julia was taken sick during the ninth week 
of the test and for a few days her milk yield fell off nearly one- 
half. Her illness and slow recovery considerably reduced the 
average milk and fat yield as may be seen by a glance at the 
table. 

In lot B, Dora did not enter the experiment until the fourth 
week and was then fresh in milk. She was giving from 40 to 50 
pounds of milk daily, which amount increased the average yield, 
as is seen in Table II. During the sixth week she was "off 
feed" and her milk fell from 325 pounds during the fifth week 
to 232 pounds. At the same time her average per cent of fat 
was over one per cent higher than during the week previous, as 
well as during the following week. This explains the high 
average of 3.98 per cent during the sixth week. She quickly 
regained nearly her former flow and at the close of the experi- 
ment was averaging 42 pounds per day. 

In lot C, Jennie calved Nov. 8 and entered the experiment 
the second week, fresh in milk. Her coming into this lot 
increased both the average yield of milk and the per cent of fat 
for the second and succeeding weeks. During the twentieth 
week, Clara, of lot C, was taken suddenly ill with high fever 
and died. Upon examination, she was found to have accumur 
lations of fatty tissue in close proximity to the vital organs. 
During the twenty-first week. May, of lot C, was taken ill in a 
similar manner to Clara, but her life was saved. It will be 
remembered that the cows in this lot received a highly carbona- 
ceous ration. The grain consisted of two parts, by weight, of 
corn meal and one part of wheat bran, while the silage was rich 
in corn and had been increased five pounds each about a month 
before the cows became sick. It may be that so highly carbona- 
ceous a ration has a heating tendency upon the animal body. If 



42 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



this be the case, feeding the ration for so long a period, might, 
in its cumulative effects, result as disastrously as mentioned 
above. Although Jennie 2d came through the experiment 
safely on the same ration, still, when the effect upon Clara and 
May is considered, we cannot help concluding that the ration is 
not a good one for long, continuous feeding. 

To return to the study of the comparative effect of the three 
rations upon the yield and quality of milk, the results show that 
there is practically no difference between them so far as their 
effect on the percentage of fat is concerned. In general, there 
is a gradual increase in the richness of the milk from the begin- 
ning of each experiment until the end, regardless of the kind of 
food. An average of the per cents of fat for periods of four 
weeks each will present the fact more clearly, and such an 
average is given in tabular form below. The first two weeks are 
omitted in striking the average in all cases. 







1895-6. 






1896-7. 


1 




Lot and kind of ration. 


Lot an 


d kind of ration. 


A 


B 


c 


A 


B 


c 




Narrow. 


Medium. 


Wide. 


Narrow. 


Medium. 


Wide. 




per cent 


per cent 


per cent 


per cent 


per cent 


per cent 




fat. 


fat. 


fat. 


fat. 


fat. 


fat 


1st four weeks. . . . 


3-46 


3- 40 


3-47 


3-29 


3-77 


3.93 


2d four weeks .... 


329 


3-14 


3-32 


3-24 


3-44 


3-85 


3d four weeks. . . . 


3 44 


3-37 


3-27 


3-2.^ 


3-47 


4.07 


4th four weeks. . . . 


3-54 


3-55 


3-47 


3.28 


349 


4.07 


5th four weeks. . . . 


3.68 


3-65 


3.68 


3-34 


3.56 






An average of this kind balances the variations from week to 
week, and places the per cents of fat in a light where conclusions 
can be more readily drawn therefrom. The reason for the high 
average during the first four weeks in lot B, year 1896-7, has 
already been indicated in the discussion concerning Dora's enter- 
ing the experiment when fresh in milk, and later becoming 
reduced in flow and increased in fat by forced feeding. Omitting 
this period, it will be noticed that the average for the remaining 
periods bear the same relation to each other as those for lot A. 
In the first experiment there was an increase from the beginning 
to the end with each lot of about two-tenths of one per cent of 
fat. In the second experiment this increase was about one-tenth 
of one per cent. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



43 



When we examine the yield of milk and of fat we do not find 
the same uniformity as is observed in the per cent of fat. If 
an average ^e taken of the yield of milk and fat for the first 
four weeks after the first two, and for the last four weeks of the 
experiments we find the following per cent of decrease from 
beginning to end : 





1895-6. 
Lot and kind of ration. 


1896-7. 
Lot and kind of ration. 


A 

Narrow. 


B 

Medium. 


C 
Wide. 


A 
Narrow. 


B 

Medium. 


c 

Wide. 


Per cent decrease in milk 
Per cent decrease in fat 


17-5 
12.0 


18.0 
12.0 


15-5 
12.0 


17.8 
15.6 


3-0 
6.0 


14.4 
10.3 



The decrease for 1895-6 was the same with all rations except 
for a slight difference in favor of the cows receiving the wide 
ration. During the year 1896-7 the yields are not so uniform, 
but lot B shows a much smaller decrease than either of the 
other lots. Taking both experiments into account it would 
seem that the medium ration had a more favorable influence 
upon the continued production of milk and total butter-fat than 
either the wide or narrow rations. Yet, if individual cases are 
considered, we find Belva 2d, on the narrow ration, holding out 
in her milk flow during both years as well as, or better than, 
any of the cows on the medium ration. 

Number of Pounds of Dry Matter Required in Each Ration to 
Produce 100 Pounds of Milk and One Pound of Fat 





Lot a. 
Narrow ration. 


Lot B. 
Medium ration. 


Lot C. 
Wide ration. 


Milk. 


Fat. 


Milk. 


Fat. 


Milk. 


Fat. 


1895-6 

i8q6-7 


90.2 
106.6 


26.0 

32.3 


102.8 
85.2 


30.1 
23-9 


98.3 
92.8 


28.7 
23-4 




Average 


97.5 


28.8 


93-0 


26.6 


95 7 


25.9 



Weight of Cows 

Whether or not the different rations had any particular effect 
upon the live weight of the cows may be studied by recourse to 
data already given, but an average of the gain of each lot during 
the twenty-two weeks together with their average age is tabu- 
lated here, for more ready reference. During the first year none 



44 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

of the cows had reached full age and during the second year two 
of lot A and one of lot B were five j^ears old. Since the cows 
in lot A were older than the others, it might seem that the nar- 





Lot a. 
Narrow ration. 


Lot B. 
Medium ration. 


Lot C. 
Wide ration. 


Age. 


Gain per 
head. 


Age. 


Gain per 
head. 


Age. 


Gain per 
head. 


1896-6 


4>^ 


163 


3 
4 


123 
lOI 


3 

3% 


145 
65 


i8q6-7 









row ration had a tendency to fatten the animals more than the 
other rations. However, the differences are so slight that it is 
safe to say that the gains in weight are due more to growth than 
to any particular effect of the food. 



CHARTS 

The records for milk and fat production as given in Tables I 
and II are shown diagramatically in the six charts immediately 
following. They show the average daily yield of milk, average 
per cent of fat and average weekly yield of fat for both experi- 
ments. Passing from left to right in the charts each division 
represents one week. Counting upward, each of the small 
spaces represents one-half pound of milk, five one-hundredths 
of one per cent fat, or one-tenth of a pound of fat as the case 
may be. 




- Diagrain showing the average daily yield of -milk for each week 
during the experiment of iSg^-6. Each space between the perpen- 
dicular lines represents one week. Each space between the horizontal 
lines represents one-half pound of nnlk. 




2.— Diagram shoiving the average daily yield of milk for each week 
during the experiment of jSgd-y. Each space betiveen the perpen- 
dicular lines represents one cLieek. Each space between the horizontal 
lines represents one-half pound of milk. 




3- — Diagram showing the average per cent of fat for each week during 
the experiment of iSg^-6. Each space between the perpendicular 
lines represents one week. Each space between the horizontal lines 
represents five one-hundredths of one per cent of fat. 






4- — Diagram showing the average per cent of fat for each week during 
the experiment of i8g6-j. Each space betiveen the perpendicular 
lines represents one week. Each space between the hoiizontal lines 
represents five one-hundredths of one per cent of fat. 




5. — Diagram showing the average weekly yield of butter fat during the 
experirnefit of i8g5-6. Each space between the perpendicular lines 
represents one week. Each space between the horizontal lines repre- 
sents one-tenth of one pound of fat. 




—Dia(rraui showing the average weekly yield oj butter fat during the 
experiment of iSg6-j. Each space betiveeft the perpendicular lines 
represents one week. Each space between the horizontal Hues repre- 
sents one-tenth of one potcnd of fat. 



52 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



Feeding Palm Nut Meal 

To carry still further the study of the effect of food upon tnilk 
production a trial was made with palm nut meal. This work was 
carried on during the winter of 1897 by George N. Lauman, then 
a Senior in the College of Agriculture. An experiment with this 
food has a double interest because it is the one that Kiihn found 
would increase the per cent of fat in the milk as has been seen in 
the summary of his work on page 26. 

Palm nut meal is the by-product resulting from the extraction 
of the oil from the fruit of a species of palms which are native to 
the west coast of Africa. It is a highly nitrogenous product, its 
percentage of digestible composition being protein 16. 6, fiber 16.6, 
nitrogen free extract 41.4 and fat 3.6. In Europe, and especially 
Germany, it has long been a popular dairy food because of its 
stimulative effect upon milk production, although not all feeders 
and experimenters have found it to increase the fat content of 
the milk as was reported by Kiihn. 

The meal used in this experiment was imported from Germany. 
Six of the University cows were chosen for the test and divided 
into two lots of three each. Before giving them the palm nut 
meal, their regular daily ration had consisted of from 8 to 10 
pounds of a grain mixture composed of three parts gluten feed, 
two parts cottonseed meal, and one part wheat bran, together 
with what silage and mixed hay they would eat. 

The names of the cows in each lot, together with their age, 
date of calving and weights are given below : 



Name of breed. 



Lot No. i. 
Glista Netherland, H. F. H. B. 32442 

Gem Valentine, A. J. C. C. 57881 

Mollie, {% Holstein 

Lot No. 2. 
Mabel 2d, Jersey Holstein 

Ruby, f Holstein 

Sadie, if Holstein 





Date of 


Weight 


Weight 




Age. 


calving. 


begin- 


end . 


Loss. 


5 




ning. 






Oct. 21, 


1339 


1289 


50 




1895. 








8 


Sept. 6, 
1896. 


107I 


973 


98 


7 


Oct. 24, 
1896. 


i34« 


1267 


81 , 


2 


Oct. 15, 
1896. 


902 


832 


70 1 


8 


Dec. 26, 
1896. 


1369 


II9I 


178 


5 


May I, 
1896. 


1407 


1386 


21 



l! 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



53 



.The feeding of the palm nut meal began Jan. 20, 1897, and 
continued for six weeks. During this time the ration of lot No. 
I remained- constant, while that of lot No. 2 was increased as 
indicated below. The daily rations were made up as follows : 

Lot No r : 

Grain mixture ^. 10 to 13 poimds 

Palm nut meal ' 2 parts. 

Gluten feed 2 parts. 

Wheat bran i part. 

Corn silage 35 to 45 pounds. 

Mixed hay 10 to n pounds. 

Nutritive ratio 1:6 

Calculating this ration on the basis of 10 pounds of grain, 10 
pounds of hay and 40 pounds of silage it would contain the fol- 
lowing number of pounds of digestible nutrients : protein 2.7 
carbohydrates 14. i, fat .96 and 26 pounds of dry substance. 

Lot No 2 : 

Grain mixture 

Palm nut meal 4 parts. 

Gluten feed 3 parts. 

Cottonseed meal , 2 parts. 

Wheat bran i part. 

Corn silage 35 to 45 pounds. 

Mixed hay 7 to 10 pounds. 

The amount of coarse fodder given this lot did not vary mate- 
rially during the whole experiment. The quantity of the grain 
mixture fed was increased as follows : 



January. 
20-31. 

Mabel 7 

Ruby 10 

Sadie 10 



February. 

1-6. 

8.5 



Febrviary. 

7-2S. 

ID 

14 
14 



Calculating this ration according to the quantities eaten by 
Ruby and Sadie, and considering the amount of silage and hay 
consumed as 40 and 10 pounds respectively, we have the following 
amounts of dry matter and the number of pounds of digestible 
nutrients consumed daily during the different periods : 





Dry matter. 


Protein. 


Carbo- 
hydrates. 


Fat. 


Nutritive 
ratio. 


Per head. 


Per :ooo lbs. 


January 20-31. . 
Febrviary 1-6. . . 
February 7-28. . 


26.06 
27.87 
29.68 


20.00 
21.51 

22.83 


309 

3-52 
3-96 


13-52 
14.42 
15-32 


1.08 
1.22 

1-35 


1:5.16 

1:4.84 
1:4.64 



54 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



On Feb. 24 the proportion of palm nut meal was increased 
from four to six parts in the grain mixture so that it made up 
one-half of the grain ration. On the first of March the meal was 
discontinued and all the cows returned to the same ration which 
they received before the trial. 

Table III contains the yield of milk and butter-fat of each cow 

under experiment for six weeks before and six weeks after the 

palm nut meal was fed as well as during the period of feeding 

the meal. 

TABLE III 

Weekly Product of Milk and Fat of Lot No. i 



Ration for 
each period 


Glista Netherland. 1 


Gem 


Valentine. 


Mollie. 


P^r 






Per 






Per - 1 


of six 


Povmds 


cent 


Pounds 


Pounds 




Pounds 


Pounds 




Pounds 


weeks. 
Usual 


of milk. 


fat. 


of fat. 


of milk. 


fat. 


of fat. 


of milk. 


fat. 


of fat. 


204.25 


3.00 


6.13 


157.00 


5.20 


8.16 


334-25 


2.60 


8.69 


ration of 


217.50 


3.15 


6.85 


176.50 


5.30 


9-35 


347.50 


2.95 


10.25 


silage, 


207.50 


3.00 


6.23 


145.50 


5-35 


7.78 


321.50 


3.40 


10.93 


hay and 


211.00 


3.25 


6.86 


116.00 


4.«5 


5-63 


313.50 


3.00 


9.41 


grain. 


202.75 


3-25 


6.59 


118.50 


4.85 


5-75 


305.50 


2.65 


8.10 


Total 


201.50 
1244.50 


3.50 

3-19 


7.05 


131-25 


5.50 

5-20 


7.22 


299.50 


3 10 


9.28 


39.71 


844.75 


43-89 


1921.75 


2-95 


56.66 


Palm nut 


206.50 


3.20 


6.61 


127-75 


5.52 


7-05 


311.00 


3.17 


986 


meal 


196.50 


3.38 


6.64 


123-25 


5-88 


7.25 


293.50 


3-26 


9.57 


ration . 


182.25 


.3.41 


6.21 


122.75 


6.00 


7-37 


295.25 


3-38 


9-98 




1S7.OO 


3.75 


7.01 


"7-75 


5-98 


7.04 


296.75 


3.48 


10.33 




184.00 


3-4« 


6.40 


117.50 


5.57 


6.54 


298.75 


3-35 


10 01 


Total 


164-75 


3-75 


6.18 


105.50 


5.85 


6.17 


295.00 
1790.25 


3-53 
3.36 


10.41 
60.16 


1 1 21 .00 


3.48 


39-05 


714-50 


5-80 


41.42 


Usual 


139-50 


3-42 


4-77 


III. 50 


5.73 


6.36 


285.50 


3.07 


8.76 


ration. 


*62.00 


3.60 


2.23 


114.75 


6.00 


6.89 


315.50 


3-30 


10.41 










108.00 


5.65 


6.10 


304.00 


3-55 


10.79 










83.75 


5-95 


4.98 


307.75 


3-25 


10.00 










93.25 


5-75 


5.36 


294.00 


3-40 


10.00 


Total 


201.50 


3-47. 




93-75 


5.85 
5.82 


5-48 


290.75 


3-25 


9-45 


7.00 


605.00 


35-20 


1797-50 1 3.31 


59-14 



* Went dry. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



55 



TABLE III [Continued) 
Weekly Product ok Milk and Fat of Lot No. 2 



Ration for 


Mabel 2d. 


Ruby. 


Sadie. 1 


each period 
















of six 


Pounds 




Pounds 


Poviuds 


Per 


Pounds 


Pounds 


Per 


Pounds 




of milk. 


fat. 
.3-90 


of fat. 


of milk. 


fat. 


of fat. 


of milk. 


fat. 


of fat. 


Usual 


183.75 


7.17 


9 




169.75 


3.20 


5-43 


ration of 


1S6.25 


4.10 


7-64 








163.50 


3-05 


4.99 


silage, 


163.25 


3.80 


6.20 








147.00 


3-40 


5.00 


haj' and 


167.50 


3-95 


6.62 


336.25 


3-75 


12.61 


141.25 


3-60 


509 


gram. 


176.00 


3-90 


6.86 


385-25 


3-80 


14.64 


148.00 


3-45 


5-11 


Total 


171.00 

1047.75 


3-45 


5-90 


408.00 
1129.50 


3.50 
367 


14.28 


^44-50 


3-90 


5 64 


3-85 


40.39 


41-53 


914.00 


3-42 


31.26 


Palm nut 


160.25 


4-07 


6.52 


434-25 


3.26 


14.16 


132.25 


3.22 


4.26 


meal 


148.75 


4-58 


6.81 


439.00 


3. 28 


14.40 


119-75 


3.28 


3-93 


ration. 


150.75 


4-33 


6.53 


418.75 


3-25 


13.61 


119.50 


3-33 


3-98 




152.00 


4.53 


6.89 


423-25 


3.26 


13.80 


122.50 


4.06 


4.97 




148.75 


4.35 


6.47 


422.25 


3.21 


13.55 


122.75 


3.23 


3-96 




149-50 


4.18 


6.25 


415.75 


3.35 


13.93 


113.75 


3.46 


3-94 


Total 


910.00 


4.34 


39-47 


2553.25 


327 


83.45 


730 50 


3-43 


25.04 


Usual 


162.25 


3-69 


5-99 


409.50 


3-00 


12.29 


104.25 


3.12 


3.25 


ration. 


169-75 


3- 80 


6.45 


389-50 


3- 20 


12.75 


IC4-75 


2.30 


2.41 




170.50 


385 


6.56 


422.75 


2.80 


11.84 


97-75 


3.40 


3-32 




171.00 


4.00 


6,84 


397-50 


3.25 


12.92 


86.75 


3.30 


2.86 




173-25 


4.35 


7-54 


374.25 


3.25 


12.16 


77.50 


3-70 


2.87 


Total 


174.00 
1020.75 


3-75 


6.53 


345.50 
2348.00 


2.90 


10.02 


67.25 


3-45 


2.32 


3-9T 


39-91 


3.07 


71.98 


538.25 


3-i6 


17.03 



A clearer understanding of the variations in the per cent of 
fat during the eighteen weeks may be obtained by finding the 
average per cent in periods of three weeks each. A table of 
such averages is given below. In order to make the study more 
complete, there is placed in the same table the average per cents 
of fat found in the records of three cows which were in the 
second experiment described on page 38. The per cents are the 
averages for the periods of three weeks each which are coinci- 
dent with those in which palm nut meal was fed. It will be 
remembered that the rations of the three cows were unaltered 
during a term of twenty-two weeks. 



56 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



TABLE IV 
Average Per Cent of Fat in Periods of Three Weeks Each 



Usual ration 
(Dec. 9-Jan. 19). . 



\ 1st three weeks. 
I 2(1 three weeks. 



^mTion"!.."'.^.^^ j . St three weeks 
(Jan. 20-Mar. "2). "j 2d three weeks. 



Usual ration 
(Mar. 3-Apr. 13). 



( 1st three weeks. 
/ 2d three weeks. 



Ration unchanged. 



Dec. 9-29 

Dec. 30-Jan. 19. 
Jan. 20-Feb. 9. . 
Feb. lo-Mar. 2 . 

Mar. 3-23 

Mar. 24- Apr, 13. 



Lot No. I 




Lot No. 2 




Glista 
Nether- 
land. 


Gem 
Valen- 
tine. 


Mollie. 


Mabel 
2d. 


Ruby. 


Sadie. 


3.06 
3-39 


5.28 
509 


2.98 
2.92 


3-94 

3-77 


367 


3.21 
3.63 


3-32 
3-64 


5.80 
5.80 


3-27 
3-45 


4-32 
4-35 


3.26 

3-27 


3.28 

3.58 


3-47 


5.80 
5.84 


3-31 
330 


3-78 
4-03 


3.00 
3-14 


2 92 

3.48 


Belvazd. 
Narrow 
ration. 


Cherry 
Medi- 
um 
ration. 


Clara. 
Wide 
ration. 






3.02 
2.92 


5-37 
5-58 


5-II 
5-30 




2.94 
3 14 


5-75 
552 


5-68 

5-44 






3-23 
3-23 


5-55 
5-47 


5-45 









Among the cows that were fed palm nut meal it is seen that 
all in lot No. i show in general a higher per cent of fat while 
the meal was fed than before, but this higher average is kept up 
for six weeks after the meal was discontinued. Mabel 2d of lot 
No. 2, is the only cow that shows a lower average both before 
and after feeding the palm nut meal than during that period, 
but her total yield of fat was less on the palm nut ration than on 
the usual ration. Rub)^ and Sadie each had a higher average 
before the meal was fed and nearly as high after as during the 
period of feeding the meal. Ruby's high average at the begin- 
ning is probably due to her being fresh in milk. A comparison 
of the records of all the cows in Table IV shows that with one 
exception (Gem Valentine) there are no greater variations among 
the cows which alternated from the usual ration to palm nut 
meal than among those which were fed an unchanging ration. 
Thus, taking everything into consideration we do not feel war- 
ranted in saying that the feeding of palm nut meal increased the 
per cent of fat in the milk. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 57 



RELATION OF THE TEMPERATURE OF THE COW 
TO THE SECRETION OF MILK FAT 

Among the many theories concerning the cause of the varia- 
tions in the percentage of fat in the ijiilk of a single cow is the 
notion that the temperature of the animal body may be a govern- 
ing factor in such variation. This idea may have found its 
origin in the statement from some sources that a cow when in a 
feverish condition is likely to give milk containing a proportion 
of butter-fat higher than the normal content of her milk. The 
inference might be that under ordinary conditions the variation 
which is found in the per cent of fat from one milking to the 
next might be accompanied by a corresponding rise or fall in 
animal heat. In order to secure some experimental data upon 
this question, a series of records was gathered along three lines: 
One in which the record period comprises five days immediately 
preceding and following the oestrum day of several cows and in 
which the temperature of the cow was taken at the time of each 
milking. A second in which is included the record of two cows 
which were spayed and the temperatures were taken four times 
daily, i.e. at the time of, and eight hours previous to milking. 
And a third in which an attempt was made to find the average 
temperature of each cow for the entire day by taking the temper- 
ature at intervals of four hours. It is well known that an 
animal's temperature varies somewhat and it was thought possi- 
ble to obtain the more exact temperature of the cow during the 
time in which her milk was secreted by recording her tempera- 
ture at frequent intervals. 

The cows from which the records were obtained were members 
of the Cornell University dairy herd. They were fed the usual 
stable ration of about eight pounds of mixed grain daily, seven 
to twelve pounds of mixed clover and timothy hay and as much 
corn silage as they would consume at a single feed. They were 
fed twice daily and were usually kept in the stable only for 
milking and feeding and, during the remainder of the night and 
day, were in a covered yard. A watering place was provided in 
the yard and no water was given in the stable. The cows were 



58 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

milked at five o'clock in the morning and at four in the after- 
noon. This divided the time so that there were thirteen hours 
between night and morning and eleven hours between morning 
and night milkings. The difference in the interim accounts foi 
the larger amount of milk being usually given in the morning 

The series of records as outlined is given in the following 
table. The study of the influence of oestrum is set forth in the 
records of eleven cows covering seventeen different periods of 
eleven days each. The oestrum day is indicated by the day of 
the month being set opposite the data for that day. The other 
days are indicated by numbers from one to five consecutively 
before and after the initial day. So far as could be detected 
from outward appearances, the period of oestrum seemed to be 
confined to twenty-four hours. The records appear in Table V, 
wherein are given the pounds of milk, per cent of fat, pounds of 
fat and temperature of the cow at the time of milking. 

The study of the influence of spaying upon milk secretion is 
set forth in the records of two cows for thirteen days, i- e. six 
days before and after the operation was performed. These 
records are displayed in Table V, wherein are given the pounds 
of milk, per cent of fat and pounds of fat secreted at each milk- 
ing and also the temperature of the cow at milking time, eight 
hours previous to milking and the average of the two temper- 
atures. 

The study of the constant temperature of the cow in its rela- 
tion to milk secretion is set forth in Table V, wherein are given 
the pounds of milk, per cent of fat and pounds of fat secreted 
at each milking and also the temperature of the cow at milking, 
four and eight hours previous to milking and the average of the 
three temperatures. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



59 



TABLE V 
Relation of Temperature of Cow to the Secretion of Milk Fat 

/. Influence of Oestrum 
Individual Records of Milk, Fat and Temperature 



Ada. 



Belle 



Belva 2d . 



Emma, 



(I) 



Days and 
dates, 



5 
4 

3 

2 
I 

Nov. I 
I 

2 

3 
4 
5 

5 
.4 
3 

2 
I 

Nov. 21 
I 

2 

3 
4 
5 

5 
4 
3 

2 
I 

Nov. 14 
I 

2 

3 
4 
5 
5 
4 
3 

2 
I 

Nov. 9 

I 

2 

3 
4 
5 



Pouuds of 
milk. 



A.M. P.M. 



II. O 
II. o 

8.3 

7-3 

II-3 

ii.o 

12. 

II.8 

13.0 
12,3 

12.8 

18.5 
16.5 

15-3 
17.8 
21.3 
19.0 
17.0 
18.3 
19-3 
19.0 

19-3 

19-3 
21.0 

18.3 

12-5 

20.3 
21.0 

21.5 
22.5 
21.8 
22.8 
20.3 
20.0 
22.5 
21.5 
23-3 
22.8 
21.8 

21.5 
20.3 
20.8 
21.3 
21.3 



lO.O 

9.8 

9-3 
9-5 
0.5 
1-3 
2.0 
i.o 
1.8 

I.O 

0.8 

7-3 

4.T3 

5-0 
6.5 
5-8 
4-5 
7.0 

6.3 

5.8 
6.5 
6.3 

8.8 

9.8 

7-5 

9-5 

21.8 

21.3 

21.8 

21.3 
21.0 
21.3 
20.8 
17.0 

173 
16.5 
18.8 
18.5 
17-5 
16.5 
16.3 
17.8 
16.0 
17-3 



Per cent of 
fatf 



Pounds of 
fat. 



A.M. 


P.M. 


4.05 


4.05 


4.30 


4.(>5 


4-45 




4.75 


4.60 


4.00 


3-85 


4.55 


S.^'S 


3.80 


4.00 


3-75 


3-45 




4-15 


3-75 


3.60 


4.00 


4.00 


3.65 


5-70 


3-35 


3-75 


4.20 


3-70 


3.60 


5-40 





5.00 


4.60 


5-35 


4.00 


5.00 


425 


4-75 


4..^5 


4.90 


4-05 


4.60 


4.20 


4-55 


2.75 


4.20 


2.80 


3.25 


3.00 


4.00 


3- 50 


2.90 


2.70 


3-50 


2.55 




3-35 


3-55 


3- 40 


3-75 


3.10 


3.10 


3-05 


3.05 


2.80 


3.20 


3-25 


3.00 



3-25 


3.00 


3-'5 


2-75 


2.20 


2.85 


3-30 


380 


3-40 


3.05 


2.75 


3-00 


2.80 


3.00 


2.60 


3.00 


2 5,^ 


2.80 


2.60 


2.80 


2.70 


2.70 



A.M. I P.M. 

I 

•446 j .405 
.473 , .456 
•369 1 

•347 -437 
.452 .404 
.501 .412 
.456 .480 
•443 , -380 

j .490 

.461 j .396 
•512 .432 

.675 .986 
•553 ' -525 
•555 
.891 

.790 
.776 

.680 j .850 
•778 ; .774 
.840 \ .774 

•770 .759 
.811 .752 



.643 
.641 

.874 



•521 

.588 
•549 
.438 
.■548 
.536 
.720 

.765 
.676 

•695 
.568 

.650 
.709 

•473 
.769 

.775 
•599 
.602 
.528 

• 530 

• 554 
•575 



.790 
.644 
.700 
.566 
• 763 

•774 
•799 
.651 
.650 
.666 

.510 
.475 
.470 
.714 
•564 
.525 
•495 
•489 
.49S 
.448 
.467 



Temperature. 


A.M. 


P.M. 


101. 6 


102. 1 


IOI.8 


103.0 


102.0 


102.4 


IOI.7 


102.6 


102.0 


103.3 


102.4 


102.4 


102.0 


102.7 


101.7 


102.0 


101.3 


102.8 


IOI.6 


102.4 


102.4 




101.5 


102.0 


102.2 


102.2 


102.2 


IOI.7 


102.0 


102.0 


102.0 


IOI.8 


102.5 


102.2 


102.0 


102.7 


101.4 


102.0 


lOI.O 


102.0 


IOI.6 


101.6 


101.6 


102.2 


101.6 


lOI.O 


101.9 


102.4 


102.6 


102.0 


102.4 


lOI.O 


102.0 


102.0 


102.2 


102.0 


102.2 


102.5 


102.3 


102.4 


1030 


102.8 


102.4 


102.2 


103.0 


102.7 


101.2 


ior.8 


101.5 


101.6 


102,0 





101.3 


101.8 


101.4 


101.2 


101.3 


101.8 


101.2 


101.6 


101.6 


102.0 


101.5 


101.2 


101.6 


101.6 


101.8 


102.2 



6o 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



TABLE V— {Continued) 

I. Influence of Oestrum 

Individual Records of Milk, Fat and Temperature 







Pounds of 


Per cent of 


Pounds of 




1 




Days and 


milk. 


fat. 


fat. 


Temperature. ] 




dates, 

1S98. 














A.M 


P.M 


A.M. 
3.00 


P.M. 
3-30 


A.M. 


P.M. 
•512 


A.M. 
IOI.3 


P.M. 


Emma 


5 


18.8 


155 


•564 


102.0 




4 


18.0 


13.8 


2.85 


3.00 


.513 


•514 


IOI.8 


IOI.8 




3 


^9-3 


14.8 


2.80 


2.40 


.540 


•355 


1 101.6 


101.8 




2 


17-6 


17-3 


2.35 


340 


.411 


•588 


, 101.4 


101.2 




I 


20 


16.0 


2-55 


3.20 


.510 


.512 


101.2 


101.7 


(2) 


Dec. I 


•9-3 


15.8 


2.65 


2.90 


• 5" 


• 458 


101.4 


102.0 




I 


18.3 


14.8 


2 90 


2.95 


•531 


437 


104.0 


101.4 




2 


19-3 


15.8 


2.60 


3.10 


.502 


.490 


101. 


101.4 




3 


20.0 


15.0 


2.80 


2.90 


.560 


435 


101.3 


101.4 




4 


18.0 


15-5 


2.80 


2.85 


•504 


.442 


101.4 


101.6 




5 


19-3 


16.0 


2.60 

1 


2.90 


.502 


.464 


101.5 


101.3 


Floss . . 


5 


16.3 


II. 8 


' 4.60 


4.80 


.750 


.566 


101.3 


101.7 




4 


14.0 


12.5 


4.20 




.588 





101.5 


101.8 




3 


15-8 


12.3 


5.00 


540 


.790 


.664 


lOI.O 


101.4 




2 


15.8 


12.3 


5-15 


5.00 


.814 


.6:5 


101. 


101.5 




I 


14-5 


12.0 


4.65 


5 75 


.674. 


.690 


100.8 


101.8 




Oct. 26 


14-3 


10.8 


i 4.90 


4.60 


.701 


497 


IOI.6 


102.0 




I 


15-0 


10.3 


1 5-15 


6.35 


•773 


• 654 


101.6 


102.2 




2 


13-5 


II-3 


! 5-45 


6.00 


• 736 


.678 


101.6 


101.3 




3 


13-8 


10.5 


5.65 


5-35 


.780 


.562 


101.2 


101.4 




4 


*I4.4 


4.0 


4-50 


-^- 


.648 





103.1 


101.3 




5 


7.0 


8.3 


3.60 


5-50 


.252 


•457 


101.2 


102.0 


Ida 


5 


58 


5-5 


3- 80 


3.20 


.220 


.176 


102.2 


102.8 




4 


7-3 


6.3 


2.90 


3-55 


.212 


.224 


102.0 


101.8 




3 


8.3 


6.8 


3.20 


3-75 


.266 


•255 


102.5 


103.0 




2 


8.8 


6.8 


340 


3-70 


.299 


.252 


103.8 


103.0 




I 


10.3 


7.8 


3-75 


4.00 


.386 


.312 


; 102.0 


102.0 




Nov. 27 


10.8 


7-3 


i 3-35 


3.85 


.362 


.281 


102.4 


101.5 




I 


II-3 


8.5 


3-75 


3 75 


.424 


.311 


102.2 


102.0 




2 


10.8 


90 


3-55 


3.55 


•363 


.320 


IOI.8 


102.2 




3 


12.0 


9-3 


1 3- 40 


3-45 


.408 


,321 


IOT.8 


102.0 




4 


11.8 


103 


1 3-00 


3-15 


•354 


•324 


101.8 


101.8 




5 


12.5 


1 0.0 


13-35 


3.10 


.419 


.310 


102.0 


102.0 


Julia 


5 


22.3 


21. 


! 3- 10 


3-50 


'.69t 


.735 


lOI.O 


101.2 




4 


22.3 


19.0 


3-65 


3.70 


.814 


.703 


100.8 


101.8 




3 


238 


183 


3-50 


3-75 


833 


.686 


lOI.O 


101.4 




2 


22.0 


20.8 


2 80 


4.20 


.616 


.874 


100.7 


101.4 




I 


20. 


20.8 


2.30 


3-25 


.460 


,676 


100.7 


101.3 


(0 


Oct. 19 


16.8 


248 


1-55 


4 75 


.250 


1.378 


102.2 


102.2 




I 


21.3 


16.5 


4-25 


3-55 


.905 


.586 


lOI.O 


101.7 




2 


23-3 


18.8 


300 


3.6j 


.699 


•677 


101.3 


101.6 




3 


21.5 


18.5 


3-IO 


3-35 


.667 


.620 


201.0 


101.4 




4 


23.5 


16.8 


2.83 


385 


1 .670 


.647 


IOI.6 


102.8 




5 


180' 21.8 


' 2.05 


4 00 


.369 


_^^1 


lOI.I 


102.0 



* One quarter of udder caked. 



Influences A^ffecting Milk Production 

TABLE ^—{Continued) 

I. Influence of Oestrum 

Individual Records of Milk, Fat and Temperature 



6l 







Pounds of 


Per cent of 


Pounds of 






Days and 


milk. 


fat.' 


fat. 


Temperature. 




dates, 

1898. 










A.M. 


P.M. 


A.M. 


P.M 


A.M. 


P.M. 


A.M. 


P.M. 


Julia 


5 


19.S 


19.0 


2.20 


3- 70 


•436 


•703 


IOI.4 







4 


20.8 


19.0 


2.50 


3-65 


.520 


.694 


101.3 


IOI.7 




3 


23.0 


18.5 


3-40 


345 


.782 


.638 


lOI.O 


lOI.I 




2 


19.S 


16.8 


2.85 


3.20 


•564 


•538 


lOI.O 


1 00.0 




I 


20.5 


17.3 


2.65 


3 60 


■543 


.623 


ICI.4 


102.0 


(2) 


Nov. II 


13.S 


15-5 


2.75 


3-65 


.380 


.566 


1 03. 1 


IOI.6 




I 


18.3 


153 


2.90 


3.00 


•532 


•459 


IOI.5 


lOI.O 




2 


18.5 


14.0 


2.70 


3-30 


.500 


.462 


IOI.5 


101.8 




3 


17.0 


14.8 


2.60 


3.20 


.442 


•474 


IOI.5 


102.5 




4 


16.0 


15-.^ 


2.85 


3-35 


•456 


•513 


IOI.8 


102.0 




5 


18.3 


15-8 


3-co 


3-75 


• 549 


.593 


101.3 


102.2 




5 


18.5 


16.0 1 


3.00 


3.20 


•555 


.512 


101.6 


IOI.6 




4 


185 


16.3 


2.80 


3-55 


.518 


• 579 


101.7 


IOI.8 




3 


19-3 


15.0 


2.80 


3.00 


■ 540 


• 450 


101.4 


102.0 




2 


17-3 


1S.3 


2.10 


3-40 


.363 


.622 


101.4 


102.4 




I 


21.3 


185 


2.90 


3-65 


.618 


.675 


101.2 


IOI.7 


(3) 


Nov. 30 


20.5 


16.0 


2-75 


2.80 


.564 


.448 


102.0 


102.4 




I 


19-5 


16.5 


3-15 


3.C0 


.614 


•495 


101.4 


IOI.7 




2 


20.0 


17.0 


2.85 


3.00 


• 570 


.510 


101.2 


102.0 




3 


20.3 


16.8 


2.80 


3-35 


.568 


•563 


101.8 


IOI.8 




4 


2J.5 


16.8 


2.90 


3-35 


.624 


•563 


101.4 


101.6 




5 


19.0 


16.8 


2.90 


3.10 


• 551 


.521 


101.4 


101.6 


Kate 


5 




















4 


II-3 


ICO 


3-15 


3-40 


• 356 


.340 


ior.9 


102.4 




3 


II. 


9-5 


2.80 


305 


.308 


.290 


101.4 


101.8 




2 


"•5 


9-3 


3-40 


3-40 


.391 


.316 


101.4 


101.6 




I 


II. 8 


8.5 


3.20 


3- 40 


.358 


•293 


101.5 


101.6 


(I) 


Nov. 2 


11.8 


9-3 


3.20 


3.80 


•358 


•353 


102. 1 


102.2 




I 


10.8 


9-3 


3.20 


3-55 


.346 


•330 


102.3 


102.4 




2 


12.0 


9.8 


3.20 


3-70 


•384 


•363 


102.2 


102.2 




3 


123 


lO.O 


3.15 


3-70 


•387 


•370 


101.8 


102.5 




4 


12.3 


10. 


3. CO 


4.00 


•369 


.400 


102.2 


— 




5 


12.3 


9.3 


3.10 


3-8o 


.381 


•353 


101.4 


101.5 




.5 
4 


11-3 


10.3 





3-30 




.340 


101.7 


102.6 




3 


II-3 


10 


3.00 


3.20 


•339 


.320 


102.0 


102.0 




2 


II. 


9.0 


2.80 


2.80 


.308 


.252 


102.0 


101.4 




I 


II. 8 


9.0 


3.00 


3.65 


i .354 


■329 


101.8 


102.0 


(2) 


Nov. 21 


10.3 


8.5 


3-40 


4.00 


•350 


■ 340 


102.2 


102.3 




I 


II-3 


9-3 


3-45 


360 


i -390 


•335 


lOI.O 


101.8 




2 


11-5 


9-5 


3-45 


3-25 


1 ^397 


•309 


1 IOI.6 


102.3 




3 


11-5 


9.8 


3.20 


3-45 


.368 


.338 


101.8 


102.6 




4 


II. 8 


9-3 


3-25 


3-40 


.384 


■3'6 


101.6 


102.4 




5 


II-3 


9.8 


3-25 


3.60 


' •.397 


.353 


101.6 1 102.6 



62 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



TABLE N— {Continued) 
I. Itifluence of Oestrutn 



Individual Records of Milk, Fat and Temperature 







Pounds of 


Per cent of 


Pounds of 




1 




Days and 


milk. 


fat. 


fat. 


Temperature. | 




dates, 

1S9S. 












A.M. 

II. 


P.M. 

9.8, 


A.M. 


P.M. 


A.M. 
.418 


P.M. 
.392 


A.M. 


P.M. 


Mabel 2d ... . 


5 


; 3.80 


4.00 


IOI.4 


IOI.7 




4 


II.8 


9-3 


1 405 


3.60 


.478 


.335 


IOI.2 


101.3 




3 


10.5 


II-3 


! 2.70 


4.15 


.284 


.467 


lOI.O 


101.8 




2 


II. 8 


10.8 


3-95 


4.40 


.466 


•475 


lOI.O 


IOI.4 




I 


TI-3 


lO.O 


' 3-55 


4.10 


.401 


.410 


IGI.O 


IOI.8 


(I) 


Oct, 24 


12.0 


lO.O 


3-50 


4-15 


.420 


•415 


IOI.6 


102.0 




I 


12.3 


10.3 


4-55 


4.15 


.560 


.427 


100.8 


102.3 




2 


II. 8 


10.3 


4-15 


4.55 


.490 


.470 


102.5 


101.5 




3 


II-5 


8.5 




4.25 





.361 


IOI.8 


103.8 




4 


II-5 


7.8 


4.20 


4-45 


•483 


■ 347 


104.0 


102.4 




5 


lO.O 


8.8 





4.00 




■ 352 


IOI.3 


101.6 




5 


*6.3 


7-5 


5.00 


4.00 


•315 


.300 


100.8 


101. 




4 


12.3 


9-5 


4.80 


3-85 


•5^0 


.366 


IOI.9 


102.0 




3 


II. 


9.8 


3.20 


3-75 


j -352 


.368 


IOI.6 


102.0 




2 


lO.O 


II-3 


3.C0 


3-65 


1 .300 


.412 


101.6 


lOI.O 




I 


12.3 


10.5 


4.20 


3.65 


1 -517 


■383 


101.6 


102.0 


(2) 


Nov. 14 


12.3 


95 


3-50 


4.00 


■431 


.380 


101.8 


IOI.4 




I 


II. 5 


95 


3-95 


4.25 


• 454 


.404 


102.7 


101.8 




2 


II. 8 


9.8 


4.'0 


4-35 


.484 


.426 


101.5 


IOI.6 




3 


12.0 


10.3 


3-75 


3-95 


•450 


.407 


101.3 


101.6 




4 


12.3 


ID 


3-90 


3-75 


.480 


• 375 


101.4 


102.0 




5 


12.3 


lO.O 


3-70 


3-90 


■•457 


•390 


101.3 


101.8 


Ruby 


5 


19-3 


22.3 


3 95 


3-90 


.762 


.870 


101.3 


101.8 




4 


22.0 


18.3 


2.85 


3-35 


.627 


.613 


102.0 


103.4 




3 


18.3 


18.3 


3.00 


2.85 


■ 549 


■525 


102.0 


101.5 




2 


21.0 


20.3 


3.60 


3-45 


.806 


.700 


101.6 


101.6 




I 


22.8 


18.8 


3-25 


3-50 


.741 


.658 


101.8 





(1) 


Nov. 4 


22.8 


16.8 


3.00 


3.60 


.684 


.605 


103.2 


102.0 




I 


22.0 


18.5 


i 3-40 


3-25 


.748 


.601 


102.2 


101.4 




2 


25-3 


20.8 


3.10 


3-75 


.784 


.780 


102.6 


— 




3 


24.8 


21.5 


2.80 


3-70 


.694 


.796 


101.8 


101.8 




4 


23.8 


22.0 


3-25 


3-35 


.774 


■ 737 


101.6 


101.4 




5 


23-3 


21.3 


3-05 


3-55 


.711 


.756 


101.7 


100.8 




5 


21.3 


18.0 


3.10 


3-05 


.660 


.549 


101.4 


102.0 




4 


22.8 


17.0 


3.20 


3-05 


•730 


•S19 


102.0 


102.2 




3 


21.0 


15-5 


2.80 


3.00 


.588 


•465 


100.8 


101.7 




2 


18.5 


iS.o 


2.8) 


2.80 


.58 


.504 


101.2 


101.8 




I 


19 8 


19-5 


3-25 


3-40 


.644 


.663 


101.0 


101.8 


(2) 


Nov. 24 


21.3 


17-5 


3-55 


3-75 


.756 


.656 


iuo.8 


101.2 




I 


20.8 


'7-3 


3-25 


3-30 


.676 


.561 


102.0 


101.4 




2 


21.0 


19.0 


3.20 


3-55 


.672 


■ 675 


101.0 


101.6 




3 


22.3 


16.8 


3-40 


3.60 


•758 


.605 


102.0 


101.4 




4 


22.3 


18.S 


3-30 


340 


.736 


.639 


101.4 


101.6 




5 


21.8 


18.5 


3-.'0 


3-45 


1 -719 


.638 


101.4 


101.6 



* Udder feverish and caked in one quarter. 



Infl,uences Affecting Milk Production 



63 



TABLE V— ( Continued) 
I. Influence of Oestrum 
Indivipual Records of Mii.k, Fat and Temperature 



Ruth 





Poun 


dsof 


Per cent of 


Pounds of 




1 


Days aud 

dates, 


milk. 


fat 


fat. 


Temperature. V 


1S9S. 


A.M. 

16,3 


P.M. 
17.0 


A.M. 
4.20 


P.M. 

4'co 


A.M. 
.685 


P.M. 
.680 


A.M. 


P.M. 


5 


IOI.8 


102.4 


4 


17.5 


15.0 


3.60 


430 


.630 


.645 


102.3 


102.3 


3 


16.5 


14.0 


3-45 


3-65 


.560 


.511 


102.0 


102. I 


2 


I5.« 


13-3 


! 3-45 


4.40 


.545 


.5«5 


105.4 


102.0 


I 


15.0 


16.5 


3.80 


4-25 


•570 


.701 


104.4 


102.7 


Nov. 16 


16.5 


14.5 


3-95 


4.20 


.652 


.619 


102.4 


103.6 


I 


15-3 


15.8 


3-9° 


3.70 


.597 


•5«5 


102.2 


IOI.8 


2 


16.0 


17-3 


4.00 


4.20 


.640 


.727 


IOI.8 


102.0 


3 


16.3 


16.0 


3.60 


3-05 


•577 


.4^8 


101.8 


103.5 


4 


17-5 


15.0 


4.00 


3-35 


.700 


•503 


101.6 


101.6 


5 


16.5 


16.3 


3-40 


3-35 


.5^1 


■ 546 


101. 


102.0 



//. Influence of Spaying 

EMMA, (3) 

Individuai, Records of Milk, Fat and Temperature 



Date, 


Time 


Pounds of 


Per cent Pou 


1 

nds of 


Temperature. 


8 hrs. 






Nov., 1899 




milk. 


of fat. 


fat. 


before 
milking. 

100.6 


At time of 
milking 


Average. 


16 


5 A.M. 


22.2 


26 


577 


100.7 


100.65 




4 P.M. 


16. 1 


3-0 


483 


IOI.4 


IOI.5 


101.45 


17 


5 A.M. 


21.7 


2.7 


606 


100.6 


lOI.O 


100.80 




4 P.M. 


15.8 


2.9 


458 


IOI.7 


100.9 


101.30 


18 


5 a.m. 


22.2 


2.5 


555 


100.6 


lOI.O 


100.80 




4 P.M. 


16.5 


2.9 


479 


IOI.4 


100.9 


101.15 


19 


5 A.M. 


22.3 


2.5 


558 


IOI.4 


IOI.2 


101.30 




4 P.M. 


16.3 


2.8 


456 


IOI.6 


100.8 


101.20 


20 


5 A.M. 


22.1 


2.6 


575 


100.7 


IOI.5 


101.10 




4 P.M. 


1 7. 8 


3-0 


534 


101.5 


102.0 


101.75 


21 


5 A.M. 


21.5 


3-0 


645 


101.3 


IOI.5 


101.40 




4 P.M. 


16.7 


2.6 


434 


101.7 


IOI.2 


101.45 


22 


5 A.M. 


21.7 


2.6 


564 


100.7 


IOI.4 


101.05 




*4 P.M. 


15-1 


3-5 


529 


101.8 


102.4 


102.10 


23 


5 A.M. 


10.2 


4.9 


500 


102.0 


IOI.8 


101.90 




4 P.M. 


8.1 


3-8 


308 


102.4 


103.2 


J 02.80 


24 


5 A.M. 


15.0 


3.2 


480 


101.9 


101.2 


101.55 




4 P.M. 


13-5 


3-4 


459 


101.5 


101.8 


101.65 


25 


5 A.M. 


17.7 


2.9 


513 


101.4 


101.4 


101.40 




4 P.M. 


14.2 


3-0 


426 


101.5 


101.6 


101.55 


26 


5 A.M. 


18.7 


2.5 


468 


lOI.O 


101.4 


101.20 




4 P.M. 


15-2 


3-0 


456 


]Oi.6 


102.0 


101.80 


27 


5 A.M. 


17-3 


2.5 


.432 


101.4 


101.8 


101.60 




4 P.M. 


15-3 


3-0 


459 


101.9 


101.9 


101.90 


28 


5 A.M. 


203 


2.6 


528 


101.6 


101.6 


101.60 




4 P.M. 


14.9 


3-0 


447 


102.0 


101.8 


101.90 



'■ Spayed at 2. p.m. 



64 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

TABLE V— ( Continued) 
II. Influence of spaying 

RUTH (2) 

Individual Records of Milk, Fat and Temperature 



Date, 




Pound.s of 


Per cent 


Pounds of 


Temperature. 1 


8 hrs. 






Nov., 1899. 




milk. 


of fat. 


fat. 


before 
milking. 


At time of 
milking. 


Average. 


16 


5 A.M. 


13-3 1 


4.2 


•559 


IOI.4 


IOI.6 


101.50 " 




*4 P.M. 


11-3 ! 


2.9 


.328 


102.0 


103.2 


102.60 


17 


5 A.M. 


12.2 







103.0 


104.0 


103.50 




4 P.M. 


7.2 


4.1 


•295 


105.0 


iot.6 


103.30 


18 


5 A.M. 


14.0 


4.6 


.644 


IOI.5 


101.4 


101.45 




4 P.M. 


13.2 


3-5 


.462 


IOI.2 


101.8 


101.50 


19 


5 A.M. 


13.2 


4.2 


•554 


X02.0 


102.0 


102 00 




4 P.M. 


10.6 


3-2 


.339 


102.0 


101.6 


101.80 


20 


5 A.M. 


12.8 


4.4 


•563 


103.2 


101.8 


102.50 




4 P.M. 


12.7 


3-7 


• 470 


IOI.7 


102.0 


101.85 


21 


5 A.M. 


15.7 


4.0 


.628 


102.0 


101.5 


101.75 




4 P.M. 


13.3 


3-2 


.426 


IOI.6 


101.5 


101.55 


22 


5 A.M. 


13.5 


4.2 


■567 


Id. 4 


101.6 


101.50 




t4P.M. 


8.8 


2.8 


,246 


101.4 


102.2 


101.80 


23 


5 A.M. 


7-7 


5.6 


• 431 


102.8 


101.7 


102.25 




4 P.M. 


8.8 


4.4 


•387 


101.6 


101.3 


101.45 


24 


5 A.M. 


12.5 


3.8 


•475 


101.2 


101.4 


101.30 




4 P.M. 


12. 1 


3-4 


.411 


102.0 


103.0 


102.50 


25 


5 A.M. 


12. 1 


3-4 


.411 


102.5 


101.8 


102.15 




4 P.M. 


10.7 


3-1 


•332 


102.2 


102.2 


102.20 


26 


5 A.M. 


15.8 


3-0 


• 474 


102.0 


101.8 


101.90 




4 P.M. 


12.0 


3-3 


• 396 


1 102.0 


102.0 


102.00 


27 


5 A.M. 


15.3 


3-1 


• 474 


101.5 


101.6 


101.55 




4 P.M. 


12.7 


3.2 


.406 


101.8 


102.0 


101.90 


28 


5 A.M. 


14.3 


3-4 


.486 


101.6 


101.6 


101.60 




4 P.M. • 


II. 7 


3-0 


•351 


102.8 


102.0 


102.40 



* One quarter of udder feverish. 
+ Spayed at 2 p.m. 

///. Temperature taken every four hours 

GLiSTA DE KOL 

Individual Records of Milk, P'at and Temperature 



Date, 

Nov. 



6-7 
7-8 
8^ 
9-10 

lO-II 



4 P.M. 

5 A.M. 

4 P.M. 

5 A.M. 

4 P.M. 

5 A.M. 

4 P.M. 

5 A.M. 

4 P.M. 

5 A.M. 



Pounds 


Per 




of 


cent of 


Pounds 


milk. 


fat. 


of fat. 


II. 4 


3^1 


•353 


14.0 


3-2 


.448 


13- T 


3^1 


.406 


12.8 


3-2 


.410 


10.9 


3-1 


•338 


I4.I 


3.0 


•423 


II. 2 


3-3 


•370 


13.3 


3-2 


.426 


II.O 


3-2 


.352 


12.7 


3^1 


.394 



Temperature. 



8 hrs. 

before 

milking. 



IOI.4 
IOI.2 
IOI.6 
lOI.I 
102.0 
IOI.6 
IOI.6 
IOI.7 
IOI.6 
IOI.5 



4 hrs. 

before 

milking. 



100.9 
lOI.O 
lOI.O 
IOI.2 
IOI.4 

IOI.6 

IOI.2 
IOI.3 
lOI.O 

IOI.7 



At time 

of 
milking. 



IOI.3 
IOI.8 
IOI.6 
101.8 
102.0 
101.3 

lOI.I 

IOI.4 

IOI.2 
IOI.5 



Average. 



101.20 
101.33 
101.40 
101.37 
101.80 
101.50 
101.30 
101.47 
101.27 
101.57 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



65 



TABLE \— {Continued) 
III. Temperature taken every four hours 

KATE (3) 

Individual Records of Mii,k, Fat and Temperature 



Date, 

Nov. 
1899. 


Time. 


Pounds 

of 
milk. 


Per 

cent of 

fat. 


Pounds 
of fat. 


Temperature. 1 


8hrs. 

before 

milking. 


4hrs. 

before 

milking. 


At time 

of 
milking. 


Average. 


6-7 


4 P.M. 


II-3 


3-9 


.441 


IOI.8 


100.5 


lOl.S 


101.37 




5 A.M. 


12.0 


4.1 


.492 


lOI.I 


IOI.2 


IOI.4 


101.23 


7-8 


4 P.M. 


10.2 


3.6 


.367 


102.0 


lOI.O 


IOI.4 


101.47 




5 A.M. 


13.0 


3.8 


.494 


lOI.O 


lOI.I 


ior.5 


101.20 


8-9 


4 P.M. 


10. 


2.9 


.290 


IOI.7 


I0I.2 


101.7 


101.53 




5 A.M. 


13.0 


2.8 


.3b4 


lOI.O 


lOI.I 


101.5 


101.20 


9-10 


4 P.M. 


10.8 


3-2 


•346 


102. 


IOI.3 


101.5 


101.60 




5 A.M. 


13-3 


3-8 


•505 


100.8 


lOI.O 


101.4 


101.07 


lO-II 


4 P.M. 


9-5 


2.4 


.228 


IOI.5 


IOI.5 


101.6 


101.53 




5 A.M. 


12.2 


3.6 


• 439 


lOI.O 


IOI.2 


lOI 4 


101.20 


11-12 


4 P.M. 


9.0 


2.7 


.243 


IOI.4 





ior.5 


101.45 




5 A.M. 


12.8 


3-3 


.422 


lOI.O 





101.2 


lOI.IO 



///. Temperature taken every four hours 

vai^erie exile 

Individual Records of Milk, Fat and Temperatures 



Date, 
Nov. 




Pounds 
of 


Per 

cent of 




Temperature. 




Pounds 


8hrs. 


4 hrs. 


At time 




1 1S99. 




milk. 


fat. 


of fat. 


before 
milking. 


before 
milking. 


of 
milking. 

102.0 


Average. 


6-7 


4 P.M. 


4-5 


5-1 


■230 


102.4 


IOI.9 


102.10 




5 A.M. 


5-2 


4.8 


.250 


IOI.9 


IOI.7 


101,8 


101.80 


7-8 


4 P.M. 


4-5 


4.2 


.189 


IOI.9 


IOI.4 


101.7 


101.68 




5 A.M. 


6.4 


4-5 


.288 


IOI.5 


IOI.3 


IOI.9 


101.57 


8-9 


4 P.M. 


4-7 


4.2 


•297 


102.0 


IOI.4 


102.0 


101.80 




5 A.M. 


6.0 


3-9 


•234 


IOI.6 


101.8 


101.8 


101.73 


9-10 


4 P.M. 


5-0 


4.8 


.240 


101.7 


IOI.5 


101.5 


101.57 




5 A.M. 


6.0 


4.6 


.276 


101.7 


101.7 


IOI.8 


101.73 


lO-II 


4 P.M. 


4.3 


4.6 


.298 


102.0 


101. 8 


101.9 


101.90 




5 A.M. 


5-7 


4.3 


.245 


101.8 


101.3 


101.8 


101.63 


11-12 


4 P.M. 


4.5 


4.5 


.203 


101.8 





101.9 


101.85 




5 A.M. 


6.0 


4.2 
VALEE 


.252 
aE ST. 


101.6 
LAMBER' 


r 


102.0 


101.80 


6-7 


4 P.M. 


9.2 


5-0 


.460 


IOI.2 


101. 


101.6 


101.27 




5 A.M. 


10. 


4.^ 


.440 


lOI.O 


lor.o 


lOI.O 


lOI.O 


7-8 


4 P.M. 


10.5 


4-9 


•515 


IOI.5 


100.8 


101.5 


101.27 




5 A.M. 


lO.O 


■ 4.7 


.470 


IOI.3 


100.8 


101.4 


IOI.I7 


8-9 


4 P.M. 


9-5 


4-9 


.466 


IOI.2 


100.8 


101.2 


101.07 




5 A.M. 


II.O 


4.6 


.506 


IOI.2 


lOI.O 


IOI.4 


101.20 


9-10 


4 P.M. 


II. 


5-0 


•550 


lOI.O 


lOI.O 


101.4 


101.13 




5 A.M. 


10.5 


4-7 


.494 


IOI.2 


100.8 


IOI.5 


IOI.I7 


lO-II 


4 P.M. 


9-5 


4.6 


■437 


100.7 


100.7 


IOI.3 


100.90 




5 A.M. 


II.O 


4.8 


..S28 


100.8 


101.3 


IOI.5 


101.20 


11-12 


4 P.M. 


9-5- 


4-5 


.428 


IOI.5 




101.8 


TOI.65 




5 A.M. 


10.5 


4.6 


.483 


lOI.O 




IOI.5 


101.25 



66 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

I. Influence of Oestrum 

Referring at the beginning to the influence of oestrum upon 
milk secretion the records show a variety of testimony. They 
seem to demonstrate that whatever effect the oestrum may have, 
its influence upon the yield and quality of milk may not be 
shown only upon the same day that the cow is observed to be in 
the heat period. This influence may manifest itself so far as the 
milk is concerned a day or two before or after oestrum. A few 
instances will serve to indicate this. The milk of Emma (i) 
contained a higher percentage of fat on the two days preceding 
oestrum than either on this particular day or any other day of 
the period of record. And since the amount of milk given on 
the two days was likewise slightly higher than the average daily 
yield, the total amount of butter-fat for each day was correspond- 
ingly higher than usual. The temperature of the cow remained 
uniform. On the day preceding oestrum Julia (3) gave more 
milk than on any other one of the eleven days of record. The 
percentage of fat in this day's milk was slightly higher than 
usual especially for the evening milking. She showed her 
ordinary body temperature upon this day but her temperature 
was higher than usual upon the day of oestrum. 

Taken as a whole the influence of oestrum upon the yield of 
milk is slight. About two-thirds of the records show no per- 
ceptible change that can be attributed directly to this influence. 
The other third show for the most part a decrease in the yield of 
milk but the variation is slight. The influence upon the per- 
centage of fat and the total yield of fat is more marked. From 
one-third to one-half of the cows show an increase in this 
respect ; one or two show a decrease, while the remainder show 
little or no change. The instance of the most remarkable varia- 
tion is that of Julia (i). On the morning of the oestrum day 
she gave about four pounds less milk than usual which con- 
tained 1.55 per cent fat. At the evening milking she gave four 
or five pounds of milk more than usual which contained 4.75 per 
cent fat. The result was that the total butter-fat produced was 
.250 pounds in the morning and 1.378 pounds in the evening. 
On the second day following oestrum she had returned to her 
normal flow and quality of milk. Her temperature was higher 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 67 

than usual upon the oestrum day but no higher than at the two 
evening milkings four and five days following. 

The temperature of the cows shows a noticeable rise in about 
two-thirds of the records, on or near the day of oestrum. In 
only one case, that of Ruby (2) was the body temperature lower 
than the average on this particular ;iay. In one-third of the 
instances there appears no perceptible variation in temperature 
at the oestrum period. The most remarkable rise in tempera- 
ture was that of Ruth. On the morning of the second daj^ 
preceding oestrum her temperature was 105.4 a^d remained 
above 102 until the evening of the first day following oestrum. 

A general survey of the records leads to the conclusion that 
the period of oestrum is accompanied by little variation in the 
flow of milk ; by a rise in butter fat percentage in about one-half 
the cases and no change in the other half ; by a variation in the 
total fat secreted corresponding to the variation in per cent of fat ; 
and usually by a rise in temperature. It cannot be held that the 
individuality of the cow is a governing factor in this connection, 
for in the three records taken from Julia she shows a larger 
degree of variation than is found between the records of different 
cows. A glance at the charts on subsequent pages will clearly 
display this point. 

II. Influence of Spaying 

The records of the two cows given under this head show only 
the immediate effect of spaying upon the secretion of milk and 
they well illustrate how differently two animals may be effected 
by the same operation. Both cows were spayed at two o'clock 
in the afternoon. When milked at four o'clock Emma gave 
within a pound or two of her usual evening flow. The percent- 
age of fat was one-half of one per cent higher than usual for the 
evening milking. Her flow of milk on the following day was 18.3 
pounds as against 38.3 pounds for the day preceding the operation. 
The milk of the following day contained 4.9 and 3.8 per cent of 
fat for the morning and evening respectively, as against a per 
cent ranging from 2.5 to 3.0 before spaying. Her milk returned 
to its normal quality on the third day after the operation but the 



68 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

former quantity was not yet reached when the record ceased on 
the sixth day. Her temperature showed a perceptible rise 
immediately after she 'was spayed and became normal on the 
second day following. 

Ruth gave about four pounds less milk than usual at the milk- 
ing immediately following the operation and the per cent of fat 
therein was 2.8, which was four-tenths less than the usual even- 
ing test for her milk. Her yield of milk was still less on the 
following day after which it gained rapidly and reached the nor- 
mal flow on the fourth daj' following spa^'ing. Her milk con- 
tained a much higher per cent of fat than usual on the day after 
the operation and then declined gradually until it reached a point 
lower than before spaying. It should be said in this connection 
that the milk of this cow was not normal, either in quantity or qual- 
ity at the beginning of the record, owing probably to the feverish 
condition of the udder. The quality of her milk as shown at 
the close of the record period corresponds closely with the qual- 
ity of her milk in previous years. In temperature, Ruth showed 
a slight rise for twenty-four hours after spaying, but not to so 
high a degree as was reached on several instances both before 
and after the operation. 

III. Relation of Temperature to Secretion of Milk 

Fat 

The problem to solve in this connection is whether or not the 
variations in the percentage of fat occur simultaneously with 
and in the same direction as the temperature of the animal and 
also whether or not the total butter-fat secreted at each milking 
varies in unison with the variations in temperature. A study of 
the figures in Table V will show that there is no regularity in 
either of these respects. On some days the lower temperature 
occurs with the lower percentage of fat for the day's milking 
and again with the higher percentage. The same feature obtains 
as regards the relation of the temperature with the total butter 
fat secreted. In order to render the data more easily interpreted 
there is arranged in Table VI the number of days on which the 
lower per cent of fat and lesser pounds of fat for each day occur 



InfIvUKnces Affecting Milk Production 



69 



with the lower and higher temperature for the day. That is, 
taking each day separately, the table shows the number of times 
that the lower per cent of fat and lesser pounds of fat fall simul- 
taneousl}^ with the lower and higher temperature as recorded 
for the day for each cow. It is unnecessary to tabulate the fig- 
ures for the higher percentages and^ larger amounts of butter 
fat since they are readil}^ obtained by taking the differences 
between the figures given in the table and the total number of 
days. In making up the table no account has been taken of the 
days on which the temperatures, percentages of fat or pounds of 
fat were the same for both morning and evening milking. 

TABLE VI 



• 


Total 

number 

days. 


Number of days on 

which the lower 

per cent of fat 

occurred with the 


Total 

number 

daj'S. 


Number of days on 
which the lesser 

pounds of fat 
occurred with the 


Lower 
tempera- 
ture. 


Higher 
tempera- 
ture. 


Lower 
tempera- 
ture. 


Higher 
tempera- 
ture. 


Ada 

Belle 

Belva 2d 

Emma ( i ) 

Emma ( 2 ) 

Floss 

Ida 

Julia (i) 


6 

7 

7 

8 

10 

9 

6 

10 

10 

9 

7 

7 

9 

II 

.c' 

9 
13 
II 

5 
6 
6 
6 


2 
6 
4 
5 
6 

5 
3 
9 
7 
8 

7 
6 

5 

4 
3 
6 

4 
9 
4 
3 
2 

4 
3 


4 

I 

3 
3 
4 
4 
3 
I 

3 
I 

I 

4 
7 
4 
4 
5 
4 
7 
2 

4 
2 

3 


7 
7 
9 
9 
10 

9 

8 

10 

10 

9 
• 8 

8 

q 
II 

7 
II 

9 
13 
II 

5 
6 
6 
6 


2 

6 

5 
3 
• 3 
3 
4 
4 
7 
3 

I 

4 
3 
2 

4 
2 

5 
2 

4 
I 

5 

4 


5 
I 

4 
6 

7 
6 

4 
6 

3 
6 

8 
7 
5 
8 

5 
7 
7 
8 

9 
I 

5 
I 
2 


Julia (2) 


Julia (3) 

Kate (I ) 


Kate (2) 


Mabel 2d (1) 

Mabel 2d (2) 

Rubv ( I ) 


Rubv (2) 


Ruth (I) 


Emma (3) 

Ruth (2) 


Glista De Kol 

Kate (3) 


Valerie Exile 

Valerie St. Lambert 

Total 

Per cent of total. 


189 


115 
60,8 


74 
39-2 


198 


80 
40.4 


118 
59-6 



A glance at the figures in the table shows that on 60.8 percent 
of the days of record, the lower per cent of fat in the cow's milk 
for the day occurred with the lower temperature of the cow 
recorded for the day : and that on 39.2 per cent of the days, the 



70 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

lower per cent of fat occurred with the higher temperature of the 
cow. The reverse is true with the pounds of fat. On 40.4 per 
cent of the days, the smaller yield of fat for each day occurred 
with the lower temperature, and 59.6 per cent with the higher 
temperature of the cow. If the lower per cent of fat was 
always accompanied by the smaller yield of fat of the two 
milkings of the day we would not expect the result as found 
above : but since the total yield of fat depends quite as much 
upon the amount of milk as upon the percentage of fat con- 
tained therein, the result as shown in the table is not surprising. 

While the general tendency of the individual cows was to pos- 
sess the lower body temperature coincident with producing the 
milk lower in fat content still there are a few which showed a 
tendency in the opposite direction. Kate (i) and (2) produced 
milk in which the lower per cent of fat for the day fell uniformly 
with her lower temperature for the same days. But later (3) 
two-thirds of her lower daily per cents of fat fell with the higher 
body temperature. Her case is of interest likewise in that in (i) 
and (2) all but one of her lower daily pounds of fat occurred at 
the same time with her higher temperature for the day. This 
same rule holds true in her later record (3). Referring to Table 
VIII it will be noticed that Kate (i) and (2), on 16 out of 17 
days, secreted a lower percentage of fat in her morning's than in 
her evening's milk. But the total fat produced was greater with 
the lower than with the higher percentages of fat. In (3) her 
record was reversed in both respects. 

Inasmuch as the temperatures of four of the cows were taken 
at intervals of four hours and of two of the cows at milking time 
and eight hours previous thereto, it will be of interest to compare 
the records of the average temperature between milkings and of 
the temperature at milking time on the basis of the foregoing 
table. Such comparison is given in Table VII. The results 
show that the average temperature compares more closely with 
the figures in Table VI when considering the percentages of fat : 
and that the single temperature taken at milking time compares 
more closely with Table VI when considering the total pounds of 
fat. In no case is there a strong indication that a close relation 
can be traced either between the percentage of fat or total yield 
of fat and the temperature of the animal. 



¥ 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 
TABLE VII- 



71 



Comparison Between Results of Taking Temperature of Cow at 
Time of- Milking Only, or of Taking the Average Tempera- 
ture FOR THE Day, when Calculating the Number of Days 
ON Which the Lower Per Cent of Fat and Pounds of Fat 
Occurred with the Lower or Higher Temperature 



» 



Temperature taken at 
milking only. 



Temperature, average from 
two or three observations. 



Total 

number 

days. 



Emma (3) 

Ruth (2) 

Glista de Kol 

Kate(3)..._. 

Valerie Exile 

Valerie St. Lambert 

Total 

Per cent of total . . 



Emma (3) 

Ruth (2) 

Glista De Kol 

Kate (3) 

Valerie Exile 

Valerie St. Lambert 

Total . ." 

Per cent of total. . 



13 
II 

5 
6 
6 
6 



47 



Number of days 

on which lower 

per cent of fat 

occurred with the 


Lower 
tempera- 
ture. 


Higher 
tempera- 
ture. 


9 


4 


4 


7 


3 


2 


I 


5 


4 


2 


3 


3 
23 


24 


51 


49 



Total 

number 

days. 



13 
12 

5 
6 
6 
6 



48 



Number of days 

on which lower 

per cent of fat 

occurred with the 



Lower 
tempera- 
ture. 



10 
6 
2 
2 

4 
3 



27 
56.3 



Higher 
tempera- 
ture. 



21 
43-7 



Num.ber of days on which the lesser pounds of fat occurred 
in relation to temperature as per column heading. 



13 
II 

5 
6 
6 
6 



47 



21 
44-7 



8 


13 


2 


9 


12 


4 


I 


5 


2 


5 


6 




I 


6 


3 


2 


6 


4 


26 


48 


15 


• 55.3 




31-3 



33 
68.7 



CHARTS 

The following diagrams show the records of three of the cows 
as taken from Table V. The influence of oestrum on milk pro- 
duction is represented by the records of Emma and Julia, the 
former having had two, and the latter three record periods. The 
influence of spaying is represented by nine days each from the 
records of Emma and Ruth. The time of milking is indicated 
by the letters at the top of each chart, A and P meaning morn- 
ing and evening, respectively. On the seven diagrams, each 
space counting vertically, represents two tenths of one pound of 
milk, one-tenth of one per cent of fat, one one-hundredth of one 
pound of fat or one-tenth of one degree of temperature as the 
case may be. The day on which oestrum or spaying occurred 
is indicated by the heavj'^ vertical line drawn through the chart 
midway between the points which are noted by A and P as the 
morning and evening milkings of that particular day. 




7 —Diagram showitis; influence of oestrum on milk production. The 
oesiriim day is indicated by the heavy vertical line. A,mormng. F, 



evening. 




8. — Diagram showing influence of oestriiin on 7iiilk production. The 
oestrum day is indicated by tlie heavy vertical line. A, Diorning. P, 
evening. 




9. — Diagram shozuinz influence of oestrum on milk production. The 
oestrum day is indicated by the heavy vertical line. A, morning. P, 
evening. 




lo. — Diagram showing influence of oestrum on milk production. The 
oestrum day is indicated by the heavy vertical line. A, morning. P. 
evening. 




II. — Diagram showing influence of oestrum on milk production. The 
oestrum day is indicated by theheavy vertical line. A, morning. P, 
evening. 




12. — Diagram shozving i-nflueucc of spaying on milk production. The 
day o_f spaying is ijidicated by the heavy vertical line. A, morning. P, 
evenins:. 





..~g 



ifegl3H:u:j;K:iSm!itM;i3^??KH^HfeHh:^^ 



13. — Diagram showing influence of spaying on milk production. The 
day of spaying is indirated by iheheaiy vertical line. A, morning. P, 
evening. 



So Influences Affecting Milk Production 



THE RELATION OF PERCENTAGE OF FAT TO 
TOTAL POUNDS OF FAT 

A more important deduction than any yet made from Table 
V, is that in the relation between the percentage of fat and the 
total fat secreted at each milking. A large amount of experi- 
menting has been done and a great deal of space devoted to dis- 
cussion, to determine the cause of the variation in the quality of 
the milk of individual cows, but very little study has been devoted 
to the actual quantity of butter-fat secreted along with the vary- 
ing percentages. It is not enough to know that a morning's 
milk contains one per cent less of fat than the night's milk. The 
question should be : is there as much butter-fat secreted in that 
morning's milk or the milking containing the lower percentage 
of fat as in the following milking of higher quality? So far as 
the physiology of milk secretion is concerned it seems to be of 
the highest importance to know if a cow will elaborate as much 
butter-fat during the night as during the day, regardless of the 
percentage of fat content. 

The only reference to this question in Experiment Station 
literature that has come to the writer's notice is by Linfield.* 
The data which he gives however is based upon weekly com- 
posite samples of the morning and evening milkings separately. 
The period between evening and morning milking was thirteen 
to fourteen hours and between morning and evening milking, 
ten to eleven hours. Since the morning composite sample always 
tested higher than the evening sample and since the greater yield 
of milk was invariably given in the, morning, the assumption 
was that the per cent of fat in each cow's milk was higher in the 
evening than in the morning. This was quite probably not true, 
since the higher percentage of fat does not always occur with the 
smaller yield of milk, as has been shown in these pages. Of the 
ten cows whose records were examined, Linfield says, " that five 
of them gave the most butter-fat when they gave the least 
milk," /. e. the evening milk which was higher in fat content 
than the morning milk. 



Utah Experiment Station Bulletin No. 68 p. 223. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 8i 

. The data which are herein compiled show, in Table VIII, the 
number of days on which the lower percentage of fat occurred 
with the smaller yield of milk and with the larger yield of milk ; 
and the number of days on which the lower percentage of fat 
occurred at the evening and at the morning milking. Table IX 
shows the number of days on whicl^ the lower percentage of fat 
for each day occurred simultaneously with the smaller yield of 
fat and the number of days with the larger yield of fat. This 
table also shows the total pounds of butter-fat which were secreted 
with the lower and higher percentages of fat respectively on each 
day of the record. In making up Table VIII no account has 
been taken of the days on which the percentage of fat or pounds 
of milk were the same at both morning and evening. In like 
manner, for Table IX those days were not included whereon the 
percentages of fat or pounds of fat were the same at each of the 
daily milkings. 

It may be argued that the cows whose records are given were 
under unusual conditions and that the data then secured may be 
warped. Even granting this, it must be said that all of the cows 
except two were in such condition as obtains in every cow's life 
and with the exception of three or four records nothing devel-: 
oped sufficiently abnormal to exclude the cows from a record of 
this kind. Julia (i), Ruth (2) and Kate (3) showed unusual 
variations as have' been previously noted and their records might 
justly be excluded from those of the other cows. It will be 
borne in mind that all the records have been compiled from the 
weight of milk and test for butter-fat of each milking for each 
individual cow ; and that the lower or higher percentage of fat, 
larger or smaller yield of milk or of fat refers to the observations 
taken within each twenty-four hours. The tabulated data follow : 



82 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 



TABLE VIII 



Ada 

Belle 

Belva 2d 

Emma (i) 

Emma (2) 

Floss 

Ida 

Julia (l) 

Julia (2) 

Julia (3) 

Kate (i) 

Kate (2) 

Mabel 2d (i) 

Mabel 2d (2) 

Ruby (i) 

Ruby (2) 

Ruth (I) 

Emma (3) 

Ruth (2) 

Glista De Kol 

Kate (3) 

Valerie Eixle 

Valerie St. Lambert 

Total 

Per cent of total . 



Total 

number 

days. 



6 

9 

8 

10 

II 

9 

9 

II 

II 

II 

9 

8 

9 
II 
10 
10 
II 

13 
12 

5 
6 
6 
6 



Number of days on 




which the lower 




per cent of fat 




occurred with the 


Total 




number 
days. 


Smaller 


Larger 


yield of 


yield of 




milk. 


milk. 




3 


3 


7 


I 


8 


10 


3 


5 


8 


3 


7 


10 


I 


10 


II 


4 


5 


9 


2 


7 


9 


4 


7 


II 


I 


10 


II 


2 


9 


II 


— 


9 


9 


I 


7 


8 


3 


6 


9 


4 


7 


II 


2 


8 


II 


2 


8 


10 


4 


7 


II 


2 


II 


13 


9 


3 


12 


I 


4 


5 


5 


I 


6 


I 


5 


6 


4 


2 


6 


62 


149 


214 


29.4 


70.6 





Number of days on 

which the lower 

per cent of fat 

occurred. 


At even- 


1 
At morn- 


ing. 


ing. 


5 


2 


I 


9 


I 


7 


3 


7 


I 


10 


3 


6 


2 


7 


I 


10 


— 


II 


I 


10 


— 


9 


I 


7 


2 


7 


4 


7 


4 
2 


7 
8 


5 


6 


2 


II 


2 


10 


2 


3 


5 


I 


I 


5 


2 


4 

164 
76.6 


50 
23.4 



Infi^uencbs Affecting Mii,k Production 

TABLE IX 



83 





Total 

number 

days. 


Number of days on 
which the lower per cent 
of fat occurred with the 


Pounds of butter 
fat secreted 


Smaller 
yield of fat. 


Larger 
yield of fat. 


At higher 
percent fat. 


At lower 
per cent fat. 


Ada 


7 
10 

8 
10 
II 

9 

9 
II 
II 
II 

9 
8 

9 
II 
II 
10 
II 

13 
12 

5 
5 
6 

5 


5 

4 

7 
3 
4 
5 
3 
6 

7 
5 
I 

I 

5 
6 

5 
4 
9 
3 
10 
2 
I 

3 
I 


2 
6 
I 

7 
7 

i 

5 
4 
6 
8 
7 
4 
5 
6 
6 
2 

10 
2 

3 
6 

3 
6 


3.140 
7-730 
5-574 
5-773 
5-392 
6.004 
2.608 

8.773 
6.263 
6.057 
3092 
2.728 
4.034 
4.689 
7.810 
6.292 
6.908 

6.331 
6.120 
1. 918 
2.642 
1-556 
3.002 


2.958 

7.177 
4.825 
5-604 
5-463 
5-649 
2.773 
6.655 
5-704 
5966 

3.247 
2.891 

3.724 
4.352 

7. 7" 
6.617 

6.399 
6.598 
4.700 
2.002 
1.989 
1.446 
2-775 . 


Belle 


Belva 2d 


Emma (i) 


Emma (2) 


Floss 


Ida 


Tulia (i) 


Tulia (2) 


Tulia (x) 


Kate (i) 


Kate (2) 


Mabel 2d (i) 

Mabel 2d (2) 

Rub}^ (I) 


Rubv (2) 


Ruth (i) 

Emma (x) 


Ruth (2) 

Glista De Kol 

Kate (t,) 


Valerie Exile 

Valerie St. Lambert 

Total 


214 


108 
50.5 


106 
49-5 


114.436 
5T.6 


107.225 
48.4 


Per cent of total . . 



In 211 days of record the lower percentage of fat occurred with 
the smaller yield of milk 62 times, or 29.4 per cent, and with the 
larger yield of milk 149 times, or 70.6 per cent. In 214 days of 
record the lower percentage of fat for the day was found in the 
evening's milk 50 times or 23.4 per cent and in the morning's 
milk 164 times or 76.6 per cent of the whole number. In a like 
number of days the lower percentage of fat occurred with the 
smaller yield of fat 108 times or 50.5 per cent and with the larger 
yield of fat, 106 times or 49.5 per cent of the whole number. 
The total amount of butter-fat secreted by the fourteen cows in 
214 days was 221.661 pounds of which 5 [.6 per cent was secreted 
in that one of the two portions of the day's milk which contained 
the higher percentage of fat, and 48.4 per cent was secreted in 
that portion containing the lower percentage of fat. If the 
records of Julia (i), Ruth (2) and Kate (3) are excluded the 



84 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

remaining figures show that 50.8 per cent of the total fat was 
secreted at the higher percentage and 49.2 per cent was secreted 
at the lower percentage of fat. 

With the exception of the three records just named there was 
little variation between the amounts of fat secreted respectively 
at the higher and lower percentages of fat by the individual cows. 
Emma (2) and (3), Ida, Kate (i) and (2), Ruby (2) and Glista 
De Kol secreted more fat at the lower than at the higher percent- 
age. All the other records show a reverse order as to the larger 
production of total butter-fat. The conclusion to be drawn from 
the data is that when there was a variation in the percentage of 
butter-fat between the morning's and evening's milking, that the 
amount of milk containing the lower percentage also contained 
very nearly as much total fat as the amount of milk containing 
the higher percentage of fat. It will be of interest and importance 
to carry this sort of investigation to a large number of animals 
and for longer periods. And it appears on the whole that exper- 
imenters have been paying too much attention to the actual var- 
iations in the quality of milk and not enough to the total fat 
secreted. 



GENERAL SUMMARY 

The influences which affect the secretion of milk may, for con- 
venience in discussion, be classified as either transitory or per- 
manent. By transitory is meant those influences which cause 
such changes in the quantity or quality of milk as continue for 
a more or less brief period and then the milk returns to its for- 
mer normal amount and composition, regardless of whether or 
not the moulding influence be continued. Under this head may 
be classed heat, cold, fatigue, unusual or sudden changes in food 
and the like. By permanent influences are meant those whose 
effect is so fixed in the constitution of the animal that whatever 
change has taken place in the milk secreted will continue so long 
as the moulding influence be continued. Such influences as 
heredity, environment or food may be classed as permanent, but 
only and always upon the above named condition of the con- 
tinuity of the cause of the change. 

Reference has been made on page 33 to the effect of radical 
changes in food upon milk secretion and in that connection the 
matter of the proper length of experimental periods was dis- 
cussed. A difference of opinion has arisen therein as to what 
effects may be considered transitory and what permanent. Hills* 
considers four or five weeks a sufficiently long period to secure a 
permanent effect. L,indsey f holds that a period of such length 
can not be counted upon to give permanent results, as is evi- 
denced by the following quotation from the source named : " The 
fat increase was only temporary, the milk gradually returning 
(in four or five weeks) to its normal fat content." 

But the root of the matter is not so much to fix the length of 
period for all experiments as it is to ascertain the actual effect 
of the food upon the animal. The proper length of any experi- 
mental period is dependent upon the character of the food and 
upon the manner in which the animal receives it. If the food 
cause any disturbance of digestion or assimilation, the animal 
will need, a longer time to become accustomed thereto. And 
whether the animal does or does not become accustomed to the 



* Vermont Station, Annual Reports, 1900, p. 417, 1901, p. 369. 
f Massachusetts (Hatch) Station, Annual Report, 1901, p. 14. 



86 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

food may determine the transitoriness or permanency of its effect. 

Of the forty-nine experiments summarized in the earlier pages 
of this paper, the large majority of them report experimental 
periods of five weeks or less. And of those wherein was claimed 
to be found an increase in the quality of milk as the direct influ- 
ence of the food, Kiihn's experiment (page 26) is the only one 
reporting periods of more than five weeks. Kiihn states that 
his experimental periods were from twenty-one to forty-seven 
days in length. Moreover, a glance at the tabulation on page 
32, shows that the foods which seem most potent in increasing 
the quality of milk, viz.: fat in various forms and molasses mix- 
tures are the foods most likely to cause internal disorders of the 
animal, outwardly noticeable or unnoticeable, and a consequent 
fluctuation in the percentage of butter-fat. 

In the light of these facts, may it not rightly be doubted that 
any experiment has yet proven that a permanent increase in the 
quality of milk is possible as the direct result of food ? May we 
not go so far as to hold that the most that any experiment, cal- 
culated to demonstrate the influence of food upon milk fat, has 
done is to show a transitory eflFect as the result of the changed 
feeding? It has been the fault of the investigator if he has not 
carried the experiment long enough to prove beyond doubt that 
the effect of the food might have been permanent rather than 
transitory. 

But so long as the cow is sufficiently nourished, why should 
any food or combination of foods increase the proportion of but- 
ter-fat in milk? According to the latest investigations* "the 
fat of milk is a true product of secretion — a product of the 
life activity of the cells and not a product of their degen- 
eration." And it seems just to believe that the epithelial 
cells of the udder are subject to similar physiological laws as 
other secretory cells of the body. In defining metabolism, 
Piersolf says that " the cell selects and assimilates from the sur- 
rounding food materials those substances adapted to the partic- 
ular needs of its own nutrition and function, so changing and 



*Disselhorst in Ztschr. Fleisch und Milch hyg., 8, No. 8, p. 146. Abs. 
in E. S. R. 10, p. 282. 
t Histology p. 15. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 87 

incorporating into its substance the materials thus acquired that 
they became an integral part of the cell. By a still further exer- 
cise of this process, the assimilated materials are converted into 
new substances which may beietained within the cell or, as is fre- 
quently the case, given up as the various secretions of the body." 
According to Kiihn'*' "the living protoplasm of the animal cell 
is not the same as the proteid on which it feeds. It is a much 
more complex substance, mobile and constantly changing, which 
receives into itself, and as a part of its unstable self, the nutri- 
ents of the food, whether nitrogenous or non-nitrogenous ; and 
the further changes which take place and which build up the 
substances of the body, or produce its heat and force, are changes 
depending on the unstable and ever changing nature of the liv- 
ing molecule, and take place in the living substance itself. 

. . According to this view the formation of fat does not 
take place from proteids or from carbohydrates, or even from fats 
themselves present in the food, but from the living plasm which 
these go to nourish. Proteids or fats or carbohydrates may fur- 
nish the material to make fat, but only by themselves first ceas- 
ing to be proteid, fat or carbohydrate and becoming an integral 
part of the complex living substance from which the fat is after- 
wards split off." The protoplasm of each cell is, as it were, a 
law unto itself and any change made in the form or function of 
the animal must come through a variation in the cell nutrition 
and secretion. 

The matter depends, then, upon the question as to what extent 
the secretion of milk fat is a part of the natural function of the 
epithelial cells. But since milk fat has been found to be a true 
secretory product it naturally follows that it is the function of 
the epithelial cells to secrete this fat. The salivary glands of 
the infant child do not secrete ptyalin. More or less food, rich 
or poor food has no effect upon the secretion except so far as the 
lack of food would impoverish and weaken the general system. 
The salivary glands begin to secrete ptyalin when the infant 
reaches the age that nature has provided for such secretion to 
begin. And "what nature has provided" consists of the sum of 
two factors, heredity and individuality. 



* Landwirthschaftliche Versuchs-Stationen, 44 (1894) p. 257. 



88 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

The animal cell, whether secretory or non-secretory is what it 
is in structure and function by reason of a long heredity made 
up of habit, nutrition and use. The capacity for producing 
milk and the composition of the milk produced is, therefore, 
governed by the heredity of the cow plus that indefinable quality 
called individuality, which may consist, however, more largely 
of heredity than any observer can fathom. The amount of milk 
that may be produced depends quite as largely upon the quantity 
and quality of the nourishment provided as upon any hereditary 
tendencies. There may be ever so rich an inheritance of cellu- 
lar structure designed to elaborate milk, but if food for the cells 
be wanting they cannot perform their natural function to the 
full capacity. 

Nothing contained herein is intended to be construed to con- 
tradict the belief expressed in previous pages that the natural 
tendency of a very succulent or watery diet is to produce milk 
containing a low percentage of solids and of a concentrated diet 
to produce milk containing a high percentage of solids. But 
causes such as these must be continued for generations to become 
fixed to such a degree that they may be looked upon as perma- 
nent race characteristics. Such natural tendencies, however, 
give the breeder the clew of how to improve the milking quali- 
ties of his cattle. Abundance of proper food is necessary that 
the animal may be sufficiently nourished in all of its parts and 
the flow of milk kept thereby to the maximum capacity of the 
animal. The tendencies are then in the right direction and vari- 
ations are likely to occur in one generation after another, 
whereby an improvement is quite as apt to be noted in the 
quality as in the quantity of milk from succeeding offspring, 
which variation may be accentuated by the practice of a wise 
selection. The remarks made in this summary are rather 
intended to point to the probability that no experiment has yet 
proven that an increase in the percentage of fat in milk is possi- 
ble as a result solely of feeding, and to indicate a few reasons 
why the experiments have failed to prove this. 

Conclusions from Experiments 
For two terms of twenty-two weeks, nine cows were fed in lots 
of three each on different rations, the nutritive ratios of which 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 89 

were about 1:4, 1:6, and 1:9 respectively. During this time the 
percentage- of fat in the milk of each lot increased slighth' and 
gradually without regard to the kind of ration. For continuous 
feeding, the medium ration appeared to give better results as to 
yield of milk than either the narrow or wide rations. 

When the food of six cows was changed from the usual ration 
to one containing from four to seven pounds of palm nut meal 
and then, after six weeks, to the usual ration again, there were 
variations in the fat content of the milk, but no more nor greater 
than when the food of the cows was unchanged. 

The period of oestrum as observed with eleven cows was 
accompanied by little variation in the flow of milk ; by a rise in 
butter-fat percentage in about one-half the cases and little or no 
change in the other half ; by a variation in the total fat secreted 
corresponding to the variation in the percentage of fat : and 
usually by a rise in temperature. Each cow returned to her nor- 
mal milk secretion as soon as the oestrum period had passed. 

Two cows that were spayed showed a large decrease in milk 
flow, a wide fluctuation in the percentage of fat and a slight rise 
in temperature immediately following the operation. Both cows 
recovered their normal condition and flow of milk within a few 
days. 

The results of a study extending over a period of 214 days of 
record with fourteen different cows indicate that there is no inti- 
mate relation between the temperature of the cow and either the 
percentage of fat or the total yield of fat- There appears to be 
no difference in this respect whether the temperature be taken 
only at milking time or at more frequent intervals. 

In 214 days of record the lower per cent of fat for each day 
occurred 62 times with the smaller yield of milk and 149 times 
with the larger yield of milk ; 50 times at the evening milking 
and 164 times at the morning milking ; and 108 times with the 
smaller yield of fat and 106 times with the larger yield of fat. 

In 214 days of record with fourteen different cows and com- 
paring the morning's with the night's milking on each day, 51.6 
per cent of the total butter-fat produced was secreted at the milk- 
ings containing the higher percentage of fat, and 48.4 per cent 
of the total butter-fat was secreted at the milkings containing 
the lower percentage of fat. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Literature of Experimentation Touching upon the Production 

of Milk 

I. Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletins. 

Alabama, 114. — Duggar and Clark. Feeding Experiments with Dairy 

Cows. 
Arizona, 39. — True. Dairy Herd Records. 
California, 132. — Jaffa and Anderson. Feeding Farm Animals : Sugar 

Beet Pulp. 
Colorado, 20. — Quick. Influence of Food upon the Pure Fat Present in 

Milk. 
Connect cut (Storrs), 13. — Woods and Phelps. Rations Fed to Milch 
Cows in Connecticut. 
20. — Beach. A Study of Dairy Cows. 
Delaware, 46. — Neale. Dairy Value of Pea Vine Silage compared with 

that of June Pasture. 
Georgia, 49. — Wing. Feeding Experiments. 

Illinois, 17. - Farrington. Daily Variations in Milk Production. 
24. — Farrington. Variations in Milk. 
33. — Morrow. Certified Tests of Dairj- Cows. 

51. — Davenport and Fraser. Variations in Milk and Milk Production. 
Indiana, 24. — Wulff. Experiments in Milk Production. 

47. — Plumb. Does it Pay to Shelter Milch Cows in Winter? 
Iowa, 13. — Wilson, et al. Experiment in Feeding for Milk. 
14. — Wilson, et al. Effect of Feed on Quality of Milk. 
25. — W^ilson, et al. Feeding Winter Dairy Cows. 
32. — Wilson, ct al. Feeding Dairy Cows and Feeding Cottonseed Meal 

to Dair}- Cows. 
36. — Wilson and McKay. Effect of Period of Lactation on Milk and 
Quahty of Butter. 
Kansas, Si.— Cottrell. Feed and Care of the Dairy Cow. 
Maryland, 69. — Doane. The Influence of Feed and Care on the Indi- 
viduality of Cows. 
Massachusetts (State), 10. — Goessmann. Feeding Experiments with Corn 
Ensilage. 
12. — Goessmann. Notes on P'eeding Experiment with Gluten Meal as 

Constituent of Daily Diet of Milch Cows. 
32. — Goessmann. Experiments to Ascertain Cost of Food for Produc- 
tion of Milk. 
15, 22, 27, 35, 38, 41, 42. — Goessmann. Feeding Experiments with 
Milch Cows. 
Massachusetts (Hatch) , 39. — Lindsey. Economic Feeding of Milch Cows. 
Michigan, \\. — Johnson. Warming Water for Dairy Cows. 
149. — Smith. Feeding Dairy Cows. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 91 

166. — Smith. A Grade Dairy Herd. 
193. — Smith. Feeding Beet Pulp to Dairy Cows. 
Minnesota, 4. — Porter. Comparative Value of Cold and Warm Water in 

the Production of Milk. 
35. — Haecker. Dairy Herd Record for 1893. 
67. — Haecker. Investigations in Milk Production : Feeding Dairy 

Cows. 
•]i. — Haecker and Major. Investigations in M^lk Production. 
Mississippi, 13, 15, 21, — Lloyd. Feeding for Milk and Butter. 

60. — Moore. Feeding Cottonseed, Cottonseed Meal and Corn to 

Dair}^ Cows : Influence of Feed on Quality of Milk and Butter. 
70. — Moore. Feeding Dairy Cows. 
Nebraska, 30. — Ingersol and Duncanson. Influence of Changes of Food 

and Temperature on Quantity and Quality of Milk. 
New Hampshire , 2, 8. — Whitcher. Feeding Experiments. 
9, 13. — Whitcher. Effect of Food ^ipon milk. 
18.— Wood. Effect of Food upon Milk. 

20. — Wood. Effect of Food upon Milk : Feeding with Fats. 
New Jersey, 10. — Cook. Rational System of Feeding Milch Cows. 

137. — Lane. The Yield, Composition and Cost of Milk : Experiments 

with Different Rations. 
148. — Voorhees and Lane. Alfalfa Protein vs. Purchased Protein in 

Rations for Dairy Cows. 
Neiv York (State) Old Series, 33. — Sturtevant. Influence of Food on 

Milk. 
34) v35> 36- — Sturtevant. Feeding of Cows. 
84. — Sturtevant. Silage for Cows. 
104. — Sturtevant. Feeding for Milk. 
ig6, no, 114. — Sturtevant. Inflvience of Acid and Putrefactive Food 

upon Cows and their Milk. 
New Series, 80. — Wheeler. Alfalfa Forage for Milch Cows. 
97. — Wheeler. Corn Silage for Milch Cows. 

105. — VanSlyke. Effects of Drought on Milk Production. ' 

132. — Jordan and Jenter. The Source of Milk-Fat. 
197. — Jordan, Jenter and Fuller. The Food Source of Milk-Fat. 
210. — Wheeler. The Immediate Effect upon Milk Production of 

Changes in the Ration. 
New York (Cornell University), 22, 36. — Roberts and}Wing. Effect of 

Grain Ration for Cows with Pasturage and with Green Fodder. 
52. — Wing. Cost of Milk Production : Variation in Individual Cows. 
92. — Wing. Effect of Feeding Fat to Cows. 
152. — Wing and Anderson. Studies in Milk Secretion : Drawn from 

Officially Authenticated Tests of Holstein-Friesian Cows. 
169. — Wing and Anderson. Studies in Milk Secretion : Record of Uni- 
versity Herd 1891-1S98. 
173. — Anderson. The Relation of Food to Milk Fat. 



92 Influences Affecting Milk Production- 

North Carolina, ii6. — Emery. Milk Records and Tests . Variations in 
Milk. 
143 — Emery. Feeding Experiments, Milk Records, etc. 
169. — Emery and Johnson. Feeding Experiments. Milk Records, etc. 
North Dakota, 16. — Sheppard. Dairy Herd Record 1S94 : Pasture vs. 

Pasture and Grain. 
Ohio, 10. — Thorne and Hickman. Ensilage vs. Field Beets as Food for 
Cows. 
20. — Thorne and Hickman. Corn Silage vs. Sugar Beets as Food for 

Milk Production. 
50. — Ttorne, Hickman and I'alkenbach. Experiments in Feeding for 
Milk. 
Oregon, 54. — French and Kent. Dairy Rations. 

Pennsylvania, 17. — Hunt. The Value of Cottonseed Meal as Compared 
with Bran for the Production of Butter. 
24. — Waters, Caldwell and Weld. Influence of Quality of Food upon 

Economy of Milk and Butter Production. 
28. — Armsby and Hess. Cottonseed Feed for Dairy Cows. 
41. — Hayward and W^eld. Tests of Dairy Feeds. 

52. — Hayward. Rye Meal and Quaker Oats Feed for Milk Production. 
56. — Hayward. Methods of Dairy Feeding. 
South Carolina, 19. — Hart. Dairying. 

Tennessee, 3, Vol. 5. — Vanderford. A contribution to the Study of 
Economies of Milk Production. 
2, Vol. 6. — Vanderford. Rational Use of Feeding Stuffs : Winter 
Dairying in Tennessee. 
Texas, 33.— Connell and Clayton. Feeding Milch Cows. 

47. — Soule. The E;ffect of Food on Economic Dairy Production. 
Utah, 43 — Liniield. Dairy Herd Record : Winter Feeding Experiments 
with Dairy Cows. 
68. — Linfield. Experiments with Dairy Cows. 
Vermont, 31. — Cooke. Feeding Tests with Sugar Meal, Cream (Tluten 
Meal and Germ Meal. 
48. — Hills. Feeding Tests with Gluten Products. 
Wisconsin, 4. — Experiments on Milk Production. 
8.— Armsby. Oil Meal vs. Corn Meal for Milk. 
15. — Woll. Ensi-ilage vs. Corn Fodder for Milk Production. 
21. — King. Comparative Value of Warm and Cold Water for Milch 

Cows in Winter. 
33. — Woll. Rations for Dairy Cows. 
38. — Woll. One Hundred American Rations for Dairy Cows. 

II. Agricultural Experiment Station Annual Reports. 

Connecticut. — Phelps. Feeding Experiments with Milch Cows on Soil- 
ing Crops, 892, p. 127. 
Woods and Phelps. A Study of Rations Fed to Milch Cows in Con- 



Influences A.ffecting Milk Production 93 

• necticut, 1893, p. 69; 1894, p. 26 ; 1895, p. 41. Atwater and Phelps. 

1896, p. 53 ; 1897, p. 17. Phelps. 1900, p. 130. 
Kansas. — Gottrell. The Milk and Butter Product as Influenced by Feed- 
ing, 1S8S, p. 69. 
Maine. — Tests of Dair}- Cows, 1890, p. 17. 

Jordan. The Influence of Widely Differing Rations upon the Quantity 

and Quality of Milk, 1893, p. 73. , 

Jordan. P'eeding Experiments with Milch Cows : Large or Small Hay 

Ration, 1894, p. 44. 
Bartlett. Wheat Meal vs. Corn Meal : Ensilage of Mature Corn, Sun- 
flower Heads and Peas, 1895, p. 24. 
Bartlett. Gluten Meal vs. Cottonseed Meal ; Ground Oats vs. Wheat 
Bran : Silage vs. Grain : Nutriotone for Milk Production, 1S96, p. 37. 
Bartlett. The Effect of Feeding Fat on the Fat Content of the Milk, 
1898, p. 114. 
Massachusetts (State). — A series of feeding experiments with milch cows 
extending over several years. 
Goessmann. Corn Ensilage : Corn Ensilage with Gluten Meal, 1884, 
pp. 26, 42. 
Various Grains and Coarse Fodders, 1885, p. 10. 
Corn Stover vs. English Hay : Corn Ensilage vs. Beet Roots, 1886 , 

p. II. 
English Hay, Corn Fodder, Fodder Corn, Ensilage, Roots and 

Soiling Crops, 1887, p. 11. 
Various Grains and Dry and Green Fodders, 1888, p. 11 ; 1889, p. 12. 
Old Process vs. New Process Linseed Meal : Various Green Fod- 
ders, 1890, p. 12. 
Old Process Linseed Meal vs. Chicago Gluten Meal : Chicago 
Gluten vs. Cottonseed Meal : Various Green Fodders, 1891, p. 14. 
Dent Corn vs. Sweet Corn : Corn Meal vs. Chicago Maize Feed : 
Various Green Fodders, 1892, p. 14. 
Lindsey. Various Grains and Dry and Green Coarse Fodders, 1893, p. 12. 
Comparative Valve of Different Coarse Fodders : Effect of Food 
upon the Cost and Quality of Milk, 1894, p. 32. 
Massachusetts (Hatch). — Lindsey, et al. Chicago Gluten Meal vs. King 
Gluten Meal and vs. Atlas Meal, 1895 pp. 62, 65. 
The Effect of Narrow and Wide Rations on the Quantity and Cost 
of Milk and Butter and on the Composition of Milk, 1896, p. 100. 
Cottonseed Feed as a Hay Substitute for Milch Cows, 1897, p. 79. 
Effect of Feed on the Composition of Milk, 1900, p. 14. 
Michigan. — Johnson. Warming Water for Dairy Cows, 188S, p. 139. 
Same as Bulletin No. 41. 
Johnson. Experiments with Corn Ensilage vs. Dry Corn Fodder, 

1889, p. 205. 
Smith. Feeding Dairy Cows, 1898, p. 250. Same as Bulletin No. 149. 



94 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

New Jersey. — Lane. The Feeding Value of Ear Corn Compared with 
Corn and Cob Meal, 1898, p. 21X. 
Influence of Widely DilTering Rations upon the Yield of Milk and 

Fat and upon the Composition of Milk, 1899, p. 202. 
Experiments with Good and Poor Rations, 1S99, p. 216. 
Influence of Wide vs. Balanced Rations upon the Yield of Milk 
and Fat and upon the Composition of Milk, 1900, p. 266. 
Lipman. The Yield and Composition of Milk Obtained when the Inter- 
vals between Milkings are Unequal and when they are Equal 1899, 
p. 220. 
New York (State). — Sturtevant. Glucose or Starch Waste as Cattle 
Food, 1885, p. 16. Effect of Food upon Milk, 1887, p. 15. 
Ladd. Influence of Food upon Milk and Butter, 1888, p. 284. Relative 

Feeding Value of Some Grain Rations, 1889, p. 198. 
Collier. Effect of Various Foods upon Milk, 1890, p. 7. 
The Source of Fat in Milk, 1891, p. 124. 
Relation of Food to Milk, 1892, p. 143. 
Relation of Fat in Food to Fat in Milk, 1894, p. 114. 
Jordan and Jenter. The Source of Milk Fat, 1897, p. 491. Same as 
Bulletin No. 132. 
Vermont. — A series of feeding experiments with milch cows extending 
over several years, with especial reference to quantity and quality of 
milk produced. 
Hills. Test of Various Coarse Fodders and Pasturage, 1889, p. 51. 

Effect of Heavy Grain Feeding : Some Coarse Fodders : and Change 

from Barn to Pasture, 1890, pp. 65-107. 
Effect of Weather : Change from Barn to Pasture : and Change of 

Quarters : Silage vs. Corn Fodder, 1891, pp. 59-118. 
Effect of Weather : Change from Barn to Pasture : and Various 
Grains and Coarse Fodders. Variations in Quantit}' and Qual- 
ity of Milk from various Causes, 1892, pp. 89-197. 
Effect of Weather and Change from Barn to Pasture. Feeding 

Bone Meal and Various Ensilages, 1893, pp. 70-118. 
Effect of Fatigue. Feeding Robertson Mixture, Corn Ensilage and 

Beets, 1894, pp. 142-192. 
Feeding Corn Ensilage, Beets, Carrots and Various Concentrates. 

Variations in Milk due to Various Causes, 1895, pp. 157-236. 
Feeding Trials with Silage and Potatoes : Studies in Methods of 

Experimental Feeding Trials, 1896-7, pp. 134-220. 
Effect of Fatigue : Feeding Tests and their Methods, iSq7-8. pp. 

310-400: 1898-9, pp. 252-309 : 1899-1900, pp. 391-46C. 
Effect of Feeding Germ-oil Meal : Addition of Excessive Amounts of 
' Single Nutrients : A Comparison of Feeding Trial Methods, 1900- 
igoi, pp. 314-375- 
Wisconsin. — Henry. Corn Stalks vs. Mixed Hay and Clover Hay, 1884, 
p. II. 
Armsby. Value of Cottonseed Meal and Malt Sprouts, 18S4, p. 78. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 95 

Henry. Cut vs. Uncut Corn Stalks : Soiling vs. Pasturage, 1S85, pp. 

9. 19- 

Armsby.' New Process Oil Meal vs. Corn Meal, 1885, p, 97. 

Henry. Ensilage vs. Fodder Corn : Cut vs. Uncut Corn Fodder, j886, 

PP- 25, 34. 
Armsby. Bran vs. Corn Meal : Bran vs. Oil Meal : Influence of Nutri- 
tive Ratio upon Milk Products, i8S6,'pp. 115, 130, 147. 
Henry. Ensilage vs. Dry Fodder Corn, 1887-8, p. 5. 
Woll. Ensilage vs. Fodder Corn, 1887-8, p. 28. 
Woll. Corn Ensilage vs. Dry Fodder : Fodder Corn vs. Corn Ensilage 

as Exclusive Feeds, 1889, pp. 71, 106. 
Short. Ensilage vs. Fodder Corn, 1889, p. 130. 
King. Comparative Value of Warm and Cold Water, 1889, p. 146 ; 

1890, p. 163. 
Woll. Ground Oats vs. Bran : Corn Ensilage vs. Dry Fodder Corn, 

1890, pp. 65, 80. 
Woll. Relative Value of Corn Silage and Field Cured Fodder Corn, 

i89i,p. 49. 
King. Influence of Imperfect Ventilation, 1891, p. 61. 
Henry, Woll and Short. Feeding and Digestion Experiments with 

Milch Cows, 1 882-1893 ; 1^93. PP- 64-94. 
Woll. Comparative Value of Linseed Meal, Corn Meal and Wheat 

Bran, 1894, p. 113. 
Woll and Carlyle. Economy of Heavy Grain Feeding, 1899, p. 52 ; 

1900, p. 37. 
Carlyle. Effect on Dairy Cows of Changing Milkers, 1899, p. 89. 
Carlyle. Record of University Dairy Herd, 1899, p. 68 ; 1900 p. 314. 
Ilia. Ontario Agricui,tural College and Experiment Farm. 

Annual Reports 
Influence of Food on Dairv Products, 1883, p. 66. 
Feeding Ensilage and Turnips, 1885, p. 114. 
Effect of Extra Summer Fodder on the Quantity and Quality of Milk, 

1887, p. 137. 
The Effect of Food on the Quality and Quantity of Milk, i89i,p. 154. 
Effect of Food on Milk and Butter, 1892, p. 204. 
Effect of Food on Fat in Milk ; Feeding Slop and Wheat, 1893, pp. 

148-151. 
Feeding Silage : Effect of Feeding Turnips, 1897, pp. 59, 62. 
Green Oats and Peas and Oats and Tares as Soiling . Crops for Milch 

Cows ; Sugar Beets vs. Mangels, 1898, pp. 78, 80. 
Mangels vs. Turnips : Mangels vs. Sugar Beets, 1899, pp. 71, 76. 
Apples, Apple Pomace, Rape and Turnips for Dairy Cows, 1900, VI. p. 41. 

Illb. Transactions of the Highland and Agricultural 
Society, Scotland. 
Spier. The Effects of Food upon Milk and Butter, 1894, p. 83 ; 1896, p. 
269 ; 1897, p. 296. 



96 Influences Affecting Milk Production 

IV. Some Foreign Experimentation on Milk Production. 

Landwiytschaftlichen Vcrsuch s-Stationen. — Lehmann. Zusammenset- 

zung der Milch einer perlsiichtigen Kuh, V. 3, p. 195. 
Miiller. Die Veranderungen in der Zusammensetzung der Milch, 

welche von der Zeit des Kalbens abhangen, V. 6, p. 376. 
Fleischmann und Vieth. Beodachtungen iiber die Milchsecretion und 

die Fettgehalt der Milch an einer grosseren Kuhheerde, 24 {1S80) 

p. Si. 
Siewert Ueber den Einfluss der ungeshalten BaumwoUsamenkuchen 

auf die Milchproduction, 30 ( 1884) p. 145. 
Gebek. Einwirkung des Kokosnusskuchen und Kokosnussmehl auf 

die Mastung, Ertrag und Beschaffenheit der Milch, 43 (1894) p. 436. 
Henkel. Ueber den Einfluss austrengender Bewegung auf die Milch- 
production, 46 (1896) p. 329. 
Kellner und Andra. Versuche iiber den Einfluss der Verfiitterung von 

Runkelriiben, getrockneten und gesauerten Schnitzeln auf die INIilch- 

production, 49 (1898) p. 401. 
Morgen. Versuche mit Milchkiihen iiber den Einfluss der Arbeitslei- 

stung auf die Menge und Zusammensetzung der produzierten Milch, 

51 (1898) p. 117. 
Landwirlsch%fllichc Jahrbucher. — Fleischmann. Untersuchung der Milch 

von sechszehn Kiihen wahrend der Dauer einer Lactation, 20 (1891) 

II, p. I. 
Kochs und Ramm. Verschiedenartig Zusammengesetzte Futterrationen 

in ihrer Wirkung auf die Milchsecretion und auf die Ausnutzung des 

Futters durch die Milchkiihe, 21 {1892) p. 809. 
Hittcher. Untersuchung der Milch von sechszehn Kiihen des in Ost- 

preusnen rein geziichteten hollandischen Schlages wahrend der 

Dauer einer Lactation, 23 (1894) p. 873. 
Ramm. Versuche zur Ermittelung der Wirkung verschiedener Kraft- 

futtermittel auf die Milchergiebigkeit der Kiihe. Ueber die Wirk- 
ung verschiedener Melassepraparate auf die Milchsecretion, 26 (1897) 

pp. 693. 732. 
Maercker und Albert. Fiitterungsversuche mit Milchkiihen iiber 

den Einfluss fettreicher und fettarmer Kraftfuttermittel auf den 

Fettgehalt der Milch, 27 (1898) p. 188. 
Hagemann. Beitrage zur rationellen Ernahrung der Kiihe, 24 (1895) 

p. 283 ; 26 (1897) p. 555 ; 28 (1899) p. 485. 
Andra. Die Waldplatterbse (Lathyrus silvestris), ihr Anbau und ihre 

Verwertung als Futterfiir Milchvieh, 31 (1902) p. 55. 
Journal fur Landwirtschaft . — Kiihn. Versuche iiber den Einfluss der 

Ernahrung auf die Milchproduction des Rindes, 25 (1877) p. 332. 
Backhaus. Die Beeinflussung des Fettgehaltes der Milch durch ver- 

schiedene Kraftfuttermittel, 41 (1893) p. 328. 



Influences Affecting Milk Production 97 

• Milch Zeiiung-.— Klein. Futterungsversuch mit Sonnenblumen kuchen 

bei Milchkiihen, 21 (1892) p. 673. 
Kammerer und Schlegel. Ueber den einfluss der Futternot auf die 

Beschaffenheit der Milch, 24 (1895) p. 286. 
Beglarian, Fiitterungsversuche mit Leinol uud geschroteten Lein- 

samen an Milchkiihe, 26 (1897) p. 522. 
Rhodin. Futterung von Milchkiihen mit Fett in Form von Emul- 
sion, 27 (1898) pp. 306, 323. 
Ramm und Winthrop. Versuche zur Ermittelung der Wirkung einiger 

neuer Futterstuffe auf die Milchsecretion unter Beriicksichtigung 

des Fettgehaltes der mit Futtermitteln gebildeten Ratiouen, 27 (1898) 

P- 5«3- 
Ramm und Miiller. Fiitterungsversuche an Milchkiihe, 28 (1899), mit 

Tropon-Abfjillen p. 17 ; mit Brauer-Schlempe p. 97 ; mit Illipenuss 

kuchen, p. 145 ; mit Palmkern-lllipekuchen, p. 225 ; mit Tropon, p. 

241 ; mit Englisch Futterkuchen, p. 273. 
Ramm. Fiitterungsversuche an Milchkiihe, 28 ( 1899) mit Maiskeim- 

melasse p. 641 ; mit Maiskleber, p. 658 ; mit Rohzucker, p. 673. 
Momsen. Fiitterungsversuche an Milchkiihe mit Kiirbissen, 29 

(1900) p. 6. 
Ramm, Momsen und Schumacker. Fiitterungsversuche an Milchkiihe 

mit Palmkernkuchen, 29 (1900) pp. 291, 309, 340, 353. 
Vieth, Futterungsversuche an Milchkiihe mit Palmkernschrot 29 

(1900) p. 294. 

V. Resumes of Investigations of Effect of Food upon Milk. 

Handbook of Experiment Station Work (Bulletin No. 15, OflSce of 

Experiment Stations) 1893, p. 209. 
Milch Zeitung, 23 (1894), pp. 117-119, and 27 (1898), pp. 402-4. 
Deut. Vierteljahr. off Gesund., 25, pp. 235-263. 
Abs. in Molkerei Zeitung, 7 (1893), pp. 197-8. 
Vermont Station Annual Report, jo (1896-7), p. 152. 
Experiment Station Record, 5 (1893-4), p. 967. 
Agriculture of Maine, 1895. 

Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin No. 173, 
PP- 47-59- 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



002 854 939 8 



